Would I be welcome at the communion table?

[joyfulthanks]

Hello friends,

My husband and I are currently members of a United Methodist church. We feel strongly that this church is where God would have us right now.

However, many Methodist churches unfortunately stopped having weekly communion 'way back when,' due to a shortage of ordained ministers who could preside. In our church (and most Methodist churches I've attended), the practice is often to only commune once a month. I hear that this may change across the denomination, however, I think it will be awhile.

I was wondering if I would be welcome to commune at an LCMS or WELS church on the Sundays when we do not have communion at our church. My thought was that I could attend the early service at the Lutheran Church, and then go back over to our church for the late service.

Would this be acceptable, or would you find this offensive in any way? I don't want to take advantage of my Lutheran brothers and sisters, but I really strongly desire to have an opportunity to receive communion more frequently than once a month.

Any thoughts?

Thanks for your help.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[joyfulthanks]

By the way, I am aware that the ELCA practices open communion, but I don't know about the LCMS and WELS. The reason I asked in this subforum is that I'm definitely of a more conservative bent, and would feel much more comfortable communing in an LCMS or WELS church than an ELCA.

 

[LutherNut]

Hello friends,

My husband and I are currently members of a United Methodist church. We feel strongly that this church is where God would have us right now.

However, many Methodist churches unfortunately stopped having weekly communion 'way back when,' due to a shortage of ordained ministers who could preside. In our church (and most Methodist churches I've attended), the practice is often to only commune once a month. I hear that this may change across the denomination, however, I think it will be awhile.

I was wondering if I would be welcome to commune at an LCMS or WELS church on the Sundays when we do not have communion at our church. My thought was that I could attend the early service at the Lutheran Church, and then pop over to our church for the late service.

Would this be acceptable, or would you find this offensive in any way? I don't want to take advantage of my Lutheran brothers and sisters, but I really strongly desire to have an opportunity to receive communion more frequently than once a month.

Any thoughts?

Thanks for your help.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

The Scriptures teach that Christ's true body and blood is received in our mouths at the Lord's Supper. It also teaches us that anyone who does not recognize the body, who does not believe in the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the Supper, would be receiving His body and blood to their judgement, it would not be in your best interest to receive Communion.
It's not because the LCMS doesn't want you to commune, but the LCMS does not want you to do spiritual harm to yourself by receiving God's wrath and condemnation. The United Methodist Church does not confess the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in, with, and under the elements of bread and wine. If you are a confessing member of a UMC congregation, then you would not be able to receive communion at an LCMS church. The Missouri Synod loves and cares for God's people and does not want anyone to do such harm to themsleves.




Jay

 

[joyfulthanks]

Thanks for your answer, LutherNut. FYI, I do believe in the real presence of Christ in communion. And so does the United Methodist Church.

The following was taken from "This Holy Mystery - A United Methodist Understanding of Communion," which was adopted by the 2004 General Conference of The United Methodist Church as an official interpretive statement of theology and practice in The United Methodist Church.


"United Methodists, along with other Christian traditions, have tried to provide clear and faithful interpretations of Christ's presence in the Holy Meal. Our tradition asserts the real, personal, living presence of Jesus Christ. For United Methodists, the Lord's Supper is anchored in the life of the historical Jesus of Nazareth, but is not primarily a remembrance or memorial. We do not embrace the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, although we do believe that the elements are essential tangible means through which God works. "


EDIT: See post below for further clarification on the issue of the body and blood of Christ.


I'm saddened to know that I would not be welcome at the Lord's table in your church, but I appreciate your honesty.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[joyfulthanks]

Oops, I should add a bit more from "This Holy Mystery" to make the Methodist position a bit more clear:

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]"Article XVIII describes the Lord's Supper as "a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death; insomuch that, to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ" (Book of Discipline, page 64). [/FONT]



I'm not posting these statements to argue with you. I would just like to know this - if I believe in the real body and blood of Christ as articulated above, would I still be unwelcome at the Lord's table in your church?


Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[Jim47]

Hi Grace

It is ourely wonderful that you wnat to partake in Holy Communion more often, but I doubt that you would not be able to in a WELS church, however I encourage you to contact your local WELS Lutheran Pastor to discuss this. I understand fully your wanting to remain in your congregation, as church is just like family, maybe even better, but don't at least afford yourself the opportunity to talk with one of our Pastors.

You can go to our web site if need be to locate all of the churches in your area, just follow the link on the right side near the top.

God's Blessings to you.

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?

 

[joyfulthanks]

Hi Grace

It is ourely wonderful that you wnat to partake in Holy Communion more often, but I doubt that you would not be able to in a WELS church, however I encourage you to contact your local WELS Lutheran Pastor to discuss this. I understand fully your wanting to remain in your congregation, as church is just like family, maybe even better, but don't at least afford yourself the opportunity to talk with one of our Pastors.

You can go to our web site if need be to locate all of the churches in your area, just follow the link on the right side near the top.

God's Blessings to you.

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?

Thanks, Jim!

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[LutherNut]

Our tradition asserts the real, personal, living presence of Jesus Christ. For United Methodists, the Lord's Supper is anchored in the life of the historical Jesus of Nazareth,

Here lies the difference. Where the UMC states that they confess the "real, personal, living presence" of Jesus, it does not mean the physical presence of His very body and blood given into our mouths to eat and to drink. This is what Jesus tells us He is giving us. This is what St. Paul tells us we must believe and confess if we are to partake the sacrament worthily.

If you truly hold to the position of the real physical body and blood of Jesus given into our mouths to eat and drink, I would strongly suggest that you consider joining a Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod congregation, or a WELS congregation.

I'm saddened to know that I would not be welcome at the Lord's table in your church, but I appreciate your honesty.

Do not be saddened. It is because the LCMS takes very seriously the words of our Lord that we do not want any spiritual harm to befall you. It is a very loving and caring practice that the LCMS and WELS and other confessional Lutheran bodies hold. You are certainly more than welcome in any LCMS church to hear His word of forgiveness and grace.

We all pray that the Lord will guide you in your faith walk, and lead you in His will.


Jay

 

[joyfulthanks]

Here lies the difference. Where the UMC states that they confess the "real, personal, living presence" of Jesus, it does not mean the physical presence of His very body and blood given into our mouths to eat and to drink.

Dear Jay,

You keep attempting to tell me what Methodists do and do not believe, even when I've provided you with evidence to the contrary. You quoted my first post, but did you read my second post (the clarification) about what we believe? Is there some part of the following with which the LCMS would disagree?

Article XVIII describes the Lord's Supper as "a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death; insomuch that, to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ" (Book of Discipline, page 64)."

I don't really see how we're disgreeing here, based on the above. The only thing I can presume from what you've posted is that non-LCMS are simply not welcome at the communion table in an LCMS church, regardless of our beliefs about the real presence. If that's the case, it's okay just to say so.



Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[LilLamb219]

Do Methodists believe that when they receive the bread that they also receive in, with and under, the very body of our Lord? And do they also believe that the wine is wine but also the very blood of our Lord poured out for us for the forgiveness of our sins?

 

[LilLamb219]

OK I did my own homework and went to the official Methodist website to search out their beliefs on Communion and found this:

Article XVIII, The Articles of Religion, The Book of Discipline:


“The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith. "The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshiped.”

In another part, I read that they only believe in the "real presence" as being spiritual only. That is totally different from what Lutherans believe as we believe that the bread is bread and is the body and the wine is wine and is the Lord's blood; not just spiritually but truly present.

Since your beliefs according to the website do not coincide with Lutheran beliefs, then you should not expect to take Holy Communion at a Lutheran Congregation. Now, I know that some ELCA churches will communion anyone baptized, but I don't agree with their practice, but that should be for a different thread.

 

[joyfulthanks]

Do Methodists believe that when they receive the bread that they also receive in, with and under, the very body of our Lord? And do they also believe that the wine is wine but also the very blood of our Lord poured out for us for the forgiveness of our sins?

Hi LilLamb219,

I don't think we define things to the level of "in, with, and under." However, that does not mean that we don't believe the bread and wine are the body and blood of the Lord. (See statement from the The Book of Discipline in above post.) How God does this is simply a mystery.

If I am not mistaken, the Lutheran idea of "in, with, and under" was a reaction against the Catholic idea of transubstantiation. Methodists don't believe in transubstantiation, i.e., we do not believe that the bread and wine cease being bread and wine and are completely transformed into the body and blood of Christ, with no hint of the presence of bread or wine left. However, we do believe that the bread and wine, are for us, the body and blood of Christ. Again, it's a mystery just how this is so.

Does this help?

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[joyfulthanks]

Since your beliefs according to the website do not coincide with Lutheran beliefs, then you should not expect to take Holy Communion at a Lutheran Congregation.

Hi again LilLamb219,

Don't worry. It's been made clear to me in this thread that I would not be welcome at the Lord's table in an LCMS or WELS church. Based on the responses I have received, I have no intention of attempting to do so.

Thanks to all who have done their part to help me find the answer to my question.

PS: I left Christian Forums about a month ago, and primarily came back to post this question and answer one other post in a different forum. CF is not really a very good place for me right now, and I think with this post I will be signing off again. Please know that if you try to respond to me and I don't answer, I'm not ignoring you. I'm probably simply not around anymore.

Thanks again for answering my question!

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[LilLamb219]

Hi Grace,

It's not a matter of the LCMS or WELS being snobs, but that you do not believe the same concerning Communion. The Methodist website is very clear that the belief of the real presence is "spiritual only" and is not the same as what the Lutherans believe.

 

[LutherNut]

Dear Jay,

You keep attempting to tell me what Methodists do and do not believe, even when I've provided you with evidence to the contrary. You quoted my first post, but did you read my second post (the clarification) about what we believe? Is there some part of the following with which the LCMS would disagree?

Article XVIII describes the Lord's Supper as "a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death; insomuch that, to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ" (Book of Discipline, page 64)."

"Those who rightly, worthily and in faith eat the broken bread and drink the blessed cup partake of the body and blood of Christ in a spiritual manner until he comes" (Book of Discipline, page 68).

"Transubstantiation, or the change of the substance of bread and wine in the Supper of our Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith." (Book of Discipline, page 64)

This clearly states that the UMC does not believe in the body and blood of Jesus given into our mouths to eat and drink physically. This is the Lutheran teaching based upon Christ's own words. "Take, eat, This is My body." He doesn't say "This is My body in a spiritual manner," or "Take, eat, by faith."

The UMC teaching on the Lord's Supper is very different from the Lutheran teaching which is based upon the words of Christ.

I don't really see how we're disgreeing here, based on the above. The only thing I can presume from what you've posted is that non-LCMS are simply not welcome at the communion table in an LCMS church, regardless of our beliefs about the real presence. If that's the case, it's okay just to say so.

If that's all you "can presume" then you haven't read anything that I have posted.
What I have told you is the truth regarding the practice of the LCMS. You can certainly choose not to believe me. So don't take my word for it. Read this from the LCMS web site. I'm not making this up or lying to you.

The Missouri Synod does not want people to eat and drink the very body and blood of Jesus in a sinful, spiritually harmful way. It's not that we don't want to welcome you to the Lord's Table. We want to make sure you do so to your benefit, not to your detriment. What kind of Church would we be if we allowed you to bring judgement upon yourself? What kind of Church would we be if we didn't care if people were profaning the very body and blood of Jesus?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Some of MY thoughts and experineces....


1. I am not an official member of any Lutheran church. When I attended a Lutheran church with a friend (an ELCA congregation), my friend and his family assured me I was welcomed to participate in the Sacrament, BUT I insisted in speaking with the pastor. Fortunately, there was time for that. I don't recall the entire conversation but I answered all questions asked of me - fully and honestly. And I was told I was welcome to attend.

2. At the church I'm attending now (LCMS), my girlfriend (ELCA) and I did the same - abstaining from praticipating until we had a chance to talk with the pastor. We were both told we were both "welcome" We've participated ever since.


3. This emphasis on what denomination a Christian belongs to seem inapproprate to me. Not only because of the ecclesiology it implies, but because probably most guests don't consider themselves to be a part of ANY denomination - and those that do likely don't even know (or care) what their denomination teaches about stuff - even if the denomination actually does (and most don't, at least in any binding sense). Having spent 5 years actively involved in the Catholic Church, I always smile when someone says, "Catholic beleive...." It's a HUGE assumption - and quite possiblity very wrong. We can say "The Latin Rome Rite Catholic Church officially teaches" but that has little to do with what a particulare Catholic believes. My best buddy (responsible for my years in Catholicism) is VERY Catholic. He attended Catholic schools since preschool (he's now at a Catholic university), he has an uncle who is a priest, his parents went to Catholic schools through college (where they met) and are VERY active in their parish, both as teachers and his dad is active in administrative things in the parish. Anyway, after LOTS of talks with them, I'm MUCH more Catholic than Mark - and probably more than his dad (his mom is another story). IMO, it's foolish to assume that a Catholic or Presbyterian or Methodist or UCC or the participant in ANY denominaiton knows what that denominaiton teaches regarding a certain issue (even if they do) - or that they agree with it. Those are HUGE assumptions.
All this needs to be handled on an individual level.


Catholic and a few Protestant congregations that put all the emphasis on what denomination you belong to rather than what you believe seems inadequate to me and assumes MUCH. I found it ironic that Mark participated in the Eucharist (while rejecting Real Presense) while I was barred (and I accept it). Because he is a member of the RCC and I of a Protestant denominaiton. Silly. Inappropriate. Lazy.



Sorry.


- Josiah

 

[DaRev]

All this needs to be handled on an individual level.

Catholic and a few Protestant congregations that put all the emphasis on what denomination you belong to rather than what you believe seems very inappropriate to me and assumes MUCH. I found it ironic that Mark participated in the Eucharist (while rejecting Real Presense) while I was barred (and I accept it). Because he is a member of the RCC and I of a Protestant denominaiton. Silly. Inappropriate. Lazy.

It is to be handled on an individual level. That's whay at my church our bulletin asks that tho who are not instructed, are in doubt, or hold a different confession than that of the LCMS to speak with me before coming to the altar.
There are some who believe exactly what the LCMS confesses, but do not belong to an LCMS congregation for a variety of reasons. There are some who believe what the LCMS confesses, but do not know what the church they belong to actually confesses (as I suspect the OP poster does). There are some who flat out deny what the LCMS confesses, but insist that they should be allowed to commune ("Why are you denying me Jesus?").

It would be appropriate to discuss the Missouri Synod confession regarding the Lord's Supper (it is His supper, BTW), see where the individual stands regarding that confession, and if they are in agreement with it to follow up and encourage them to join the church since their confession most likely differes from that of the church they are a member of.

If the OP poster truly believes in what she is saying, then she is not in agreement with the confession of the United Methodist Church. She says that she feels the Lord wants her to be there, yet the Holy Spirit seems to be moving her to investigate the LCMS over the ELCA or any other denomination. That is the way it should be approached in this case, not simply "the Methodists don't believe in the physical real presense so you can't commune here."

I pray that ContriteHeart would return just to read the responses if nothing else.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

It is to be handled on an individual level. That's whay at my church our bulletin asks that tho who are not instructed, are in doubt, or hold a different confession than that of the LCMS to speak with me before coming to the altar.

My father (a pastor) taught me to do this. Since I had a LOT of friends that went to a wide variety of churches, I went to a lot of different church. Most of them automatically welcomed everyone. Anyway, the guideline I used - and suggest to others - is to ignore what your freind says and whatever vague thing is in the annoucments, and talk to the pastor. If you don't have time to do that, RESPECTFULLY abstain.

There are some who believe exactly what the LCMS confesses, but do not belong to an LCMS congregation for a variety of reasons. There are some who believe what the LCMS confesses, but do not know what the church they belong to actually confesses (as I suspect the OP poster does). There are some who flat out deny what the LCMS confesses, but insist that they should be allowed to commune ("Why are you denying me Jesus?").

(emphasis is mine and not that of the original poster)



What the LCMS believes about Communion OR what the LCMS teaches about EVERYTHING?


I understand this is a long (and very unhappy) issue within the LCMS and gets "cranked out" differently in different LCMS congregations. The pastor of the church I'm going to seemed focused on my faith in Christ and my affirmation of Real Presense - the comments all had to do with the Sacrament.

Am I REQUIRED to belong to a congregation assoicated with a congregation with which the LCMS has official altar fellowship? If so, I fail. Am I REQUIRED to accept all the LCMS has officially stated - including that the Papacy is the Antichrist in the Brief Statement? If so, I fail (and I suspect 99% of LCMS members do too).


"EXACTLY what the LCMS teaches..."
About what?
The Sacrament or everything?
What does "EXACTLY" mean?



For the record, the pastor of the church I'm going to (LMCS) never asked me about my views on the papacy as the Anti-Christ or even my views on the Doctrine of Election or the Communication of Attributes within the two natures of Christ (I learned my theology from F. Pieper's "Christian Dogmatics", BTW). Our emails talked about Christ, repentance/forgiveness, His presense in the Holy Sacrament.

My girlfriend is welcomed to the altar too. She's ELCA (the LCMS does not consider themselves to be in fellowship with them). The LCMS pastor did not ask her about female ordaination (which she supports).

What do you think?
Is it possible to agree with the LCMS on a Sacrament but perhaps disagree with the LCMS on some issue and still not be barred from the Sacrament?



You can read about my beliefs by clicking on the link in the signature line of my post. It will take you to my thread in the Testimony forum. I have about 2 pages of posts there (some others have posted there, too - so you need to keep reading through to get to all the one's I wrote there). IF you have the will and time, I'd be curious if I'd be welcomed to commune with you?


Share the love...


- Josiah

 

[LilLamb219]

Catholic and a few Protestant congregations that put all the emphasis on what denomination you belong to rather than what you believe seems very inappropriate to me and assumes MUCH.

Actually, if you do belong to some denomination, you are claiming that you are in fellowship with those of that denomination and what they hold as their beliefs (usually found in some sort of belief statement somewhere). If someone believes outside of what their denomination teaches then he/she should really question why they choose to remain in fellowship with that particular group instead of giving a false representation of who they are and what they believe.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Actually, if you do belong to some denomination, you are claiming that you are in fellowship with those of that denomination and what they hold as their beliefs (usually found in some sort of belief statement somewhere). If someone believes outside of what their denomination teaches then he/she should really question why they choose to remain in fellowship with that particular group instead of giving a false representation of who they are and what they believe.

I respectfully disagree...


OFF TOPIC ALERT (sorry mods!)



I doubt very many lay people (or even clergy for that matter) even KNOW everything that denomination has - as some point - officially stated and what may or may not still be on the books. Much less agree with all of it. Many of these things come up to a vote at a Convention - perhaps nearly 50% vote no on it - but the minority does not immediately resign from the denomination, they remain, even though they are in disagreement! I doubt too many LCMS members know that that denomination officially teaches that the Pope is the Antichrist (Brief Statement of 1932) or agree with that; should they all resign? I don't think so. I think most people end up being Lutherans (for example) because they joined a Lutheran church - and when they joined that church, they automatically got counted in the statistical report sent to the synodical office - bingo - LCMS (or whatever).

My strong suspicion is that nearly all people join a congregation. They join the congregation because they like it. The people are warm and embracing and caring, the sermons are biblical and helpful, the worship inspiring and helpful, they have a good Sunday school for their kids, a good youth group for their teens. Very few Americans could tell you the theological differnces between the United Presbyterian Church and the ELCA, or could list a dozen theological disagreements between the LCMS and WELS. Or care. My strong suspicion is that most LCMS members don't know all the official stands of that denomination, and most wouldn't agree with ALL of them if they did. That doesn't keep them from being a part of their congregation.


But, the issue here is:
Does a person need to be in complete agreement with everything in that denomination in order to not be barred from the Holy Sacrament? Is that the rule?