Communion in weddings?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Maybe the burden of proof is on me, but I do not feel the burden to prove it. We are going to do it, thousands of other couples do it, and we will answer to God for it.
Click to expand...
Brian's comment got me wondering if there's any historical precedent (for lack of a better term) for couples having communion during their wedding. Historically, how prevalent is the practice?
 
Bob, I don't know if there's a wide historical precedent. It may just be an RC church thing, but I believe it's a good thing. What better place to have communion than with your bride, I believe.
 
Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Bob, I don't know if there's a wide historical precedent. It may just be an RC church thing, but I believe it's a good thing. What better place to have communion than with your bride, I believe.
Click to expand...

The better place is with God's people, as He intended it. It is the Lord's Supper for His Church, not for select people.

I won't say any more, because obviously an appeal to Church history will only provide an opportunity for you to lash out at me. I also won't try and describe the nature of discipline, covenant community and pastoral oversight, since you will simply retort (as you have done several times) that "it's between God and me." Finally, I won't try and discuss the clear distinction that the Reformers and Puritans made between corporate worship and the means of grace on the one hand, and lviing one's life to the glory of God (as perhaps a mode of provate worship) on the other hand, since you will simply respond "the Reformers agree with me" as you have done several times above.

I have not tried to attack you at all. My comment about "American sentimentalism" was just that. The predominant mode of operating in America (and maybe in Canada, but I don't know and it is not to the point) is for weddings to be basically whatever the bride, groom and parents want. Releasing doves, readings from heretical books, Jewish and/or pagan and/or Islamic ceremonies included "for the family," and any other sorts of things are included. In order to protect himself from embarassment or a fight, the pastor has to have the Session lay down ground rules for all weddings.

But rather than discuss the core principle that I have clearly enunciated now three times - that the Lord's Supper is a communal meal that no private person can forbid to a communing church member - you have chosen to complain of "being attacked."

You may then have your answering to God, but I pray you would not be so flippant about that.
 
Brian,

Would it help if we distinguished between "worship" considered broadly and considered narrowly.

Clearly not everything is "worship" in precisely the same sense. That's why the Reformers also posited a principle of worship that distinguishes between formal stated services and everyday life.

I agree that we don't need a special priesthood, i.e., all protestants confess the priesthood of all believers, but that conviction doesn't answer every question.

The Reformed Reformation posited that we may only do in worship what God has commanded. We know that communion is commanded and we know that stated services are commanded and that communion in stated services are commanded. We know that marriage is commanded.

What we don't know is that weddings are commanded to be performed during services. Nor do we know that communion is commanded during a private, civil ordinance apart from a stated service.

Do these distinctions help?

rsc


Did Calvin practice communion at weddings?



Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
Brian,

Your argument seems to be that

1) if you make vows then it's a worship service;

2) all of life is worship

Is this your argument?

rsc

Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Because the man and woman are both Christians and they are making vows before God, and they are doing it for the glory of God. Life itself, lived for the glory of God is "worship" therefore a wedding would fall under that category.

Even the Reformers believed that life itself was "worship" so I hope nobody says my "views are novel".
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Anything in life done to the glory of God is worship. Working hard at your job is worshipping God. The Reformers said it. I agree.
Click to expand...
 
Brian -

The questions posed to you are not uncalled for, and are not attacking you. They are placing on you, because of your statements, and their tone, the burden of proof. It is simply not acceptable, either as a Christian or a Theologian, to simply say "God will judge me and you don't get to say anything about that. I'm doing what I want and what I believe." unfortunately, God does not play by those rules, which is why He gave the Church pastors and theologians to teach us and lead us. We do not simply get to decide everything we want and how we want and when we want on theological matters. Its never a "Me and my Bible" theology.

Secondly, some of the things you are saying are completely out of line in tone. You need to make amends on that to them. I've read the whole post twice. Humility is much more befitting a Christian than what you have shown.

Thirdly, some of the theological views you are propagating are not held by the reformers and are not held by the Confessions. To stay on the board, you have to hold to a Confession. Which one do you hold? As a baptist, I'm assuming you hold to the 1689 Confession - is this right?
 
Fred, you are correct modern "western" weddings are out of hand. All sorts of foolish things are done by christians in the modern wedding.

The problem In my humble opinion is that weddings have become a form of play or a performance put on to dazzle the guests & one up your peers.

The problem the Westminster Divines saw in their day was very different. When they advised against weddings on the Lords Day (an almost universal practice until that point) it was bcause wedding feasts often degenerated into drunkeness.

I think that it is possible to return to the older practice of simple "weddings" i.e. an exchange of vows within or right after the worship sevice on the Lords Day.

In this context I think that celebrating the sacraments would be fitting. Imagine the powerfull symbolism of exhanging vows in a service that also included a baptism. (of someone elses baby of course:D).
 
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Bob, I don't know if there's a wide historical precedent. It may just be an RC church thing, but I believe it's a good thing. What better place to have communion than with your bride, I believe.
Click to expand...

The better place is with God's people, as He intended it. It is the Lord's Supper for His Church, not for select people.

And you obviously don't see what I'm saying.

I won't say any more, because obviously an appeal to Church history will only provide an opportunity for you to lash out at me.

Don't say something you can't prove. People have a problem with me doing that and you don't know what I would have done. However, it appears that you were going to say more. I am not going to answer them though.

I also won't try and describe the nature of discipline, covenant community and pastoral oversight, since you will simply retort (as you have done several times) that "it's between God and me." Finally, I won't try and discuss the clear distinction that the Reformers and Puritans made between corporate worship and the means of grace on the one hand, and lviing one's life to the glory of God (as perhaps a mode of provate worship) on the other hand, since you will simply respond "the Reformers agree with me" as you have done several times above.

I have not tried to attack you at all. My comment about "American sentimentalism" was just that. The predominant mode of operating in America (and maybe in Canada, but I don't know and it is not to the point) is for weddings to be basically whatever the bride, groom and parents want. Releasing doves, readings from heretical books, Jewish and/or pagan and/or Islamic ceremonies included "for the family," and any other sorts of things are included. In order to protect himself from embarassment or a fight, the pastor has to have the Session lay down ground rules for all weddings.

I will take you at your word. It was more than your American sentimentalism comment that I was referring to though.

But rather than discuss the core principle that I have clearly enunciated now three times - that the Lord's Supper is a communal meal that no private person can forbid to a communing church member - you have chosen to complain of "being attacked."

It's how you did it. I also gave my explanation to support my belief. And I take it by this, you are against closed communinon? In that, we would agree.

You may then have your answering to God, but I pray you would not be so flippant about that.

I have nothing to worry about. I love God, and I believe He loves me too. Even though sometimes, some Christians don't. You are free to be condescending to me in the future too. I could care less anymore.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
Brian,

Would it help if we distinguished between "worship" considered broadly and considered narrowly.

Clearly not everything is "worship" in precisely the same sense. That's why the Reformers also posited a principle of worship that distinguishes between formal stated services and everyday life.

I agree that we don't need a special priesthood, i.e., all protestants confess the priesthood of all believers, but that conviction doesn't answer every question.

The Reformed Reformation posited that we may only do in worship what God has commanded. We know that communion is commanded and we know that stated services are commanded and that communion in stated services are commanded. We know that marriage is commanded.

What we don't know is that weddings are commanded to be performed during services. Nor do we know that communion is commanded during a private, civil ordinance apart from a stated service.

Do these distinctions help?

rsc


Did Calvin practice communion at weddings?



Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
Brian,

Your argument seems to be that

1) if you make vows then it's a worship service;

2) all of life is worship

Is this your argument?

rsc

Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Because the man and woman are both Christians and they are making vows before God, and they are doing it for the glory of God. Life itself, lived for the glory of God is "worship" therefore a wedding would fall under that category.

Even the Reformers believed that life itself was "worship" so I hope nobody says my "views are novel".
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Anything in life done to the glory of God is worship. Working hard at your job is worshipping God. The Reformers said it. I agree.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Yes, this helps. I can understand the distinctions in worship. I felt like people were putting me down for the simple fact that I was saying living to glorify God was worship.
 
Originally posted by C. Matthew McMahon
Brian -

The questions posed to you are not uncalled for, and are not attacking you. They are placing on you, because of your statements, and their tone, the burden of proof. It is simply not acceptable, either as a Christian or a Theologian, to simply say "God will judge me and you don't get to say anything about that. I'm doing what I want and what I believe." unfortunately, God does not play by those rules, which is why He gave the Church pastors and theologians to teach us and lead us. We do not simply get to decide everything we want and how we want and when we want on theological matters. Its never a "Me and my Bible" theology.

Yes, but nobody in here is my pastor. I simply stated what I believed and then answered the questions RESPECTFULLY until I believed I was attacked. Whether or not I was is irrelevant anymore because I could care less. Nobody has proven to me that communion at a wedding is wrong.

Secondly, some of the things you are saying are completely out of line in tone. You need to make amends on that to them. I've read the whole post twice. Humility is much more befitting a Christian than what you have shown.

Ditto. I believe some of the things that were said to me were out of line, along with their tone. That was the problem in the first place. When people stop trying to take my dignity away and make me the equivalent of a piece of trash, I will be humble. As it remains now, I am humble...but angry. One question, if I had said "(something) is much more befitting of a Christian than *insert any name here* has shown" how would you have responded to that? I don't think you would have liked it. Just like I didn't like you saying that. but hey, it's your board. You can put me down all you want.

Thirdly, some of the theological views you are propagating are not held by the reformers and are not held by the Confessions. To stay on the board, you have to hold to a Confession. Which one do you hold? As a baptist, I'm assuming you hold to the 1689 Confession - is this right?

I didn't know it was a requirement to agree with everything? Yes, 1689. More importantly, I hold to the Bible. That's a useful resource for us to hold to. I am a Baptist through and through.
Click to expand...
 
By the way sir, God also gave it to us to test the Scriptures and not just accept everything the pastors and theologians tell us. I am trying to follow that command.
 
Is it OK for me to hold communion with my wife and son on Passover (in the privacy of our own home) since the church will not do such a thing?

Possibly, there are times when communion is not for the masses of "believers" and may need to be accomplished at an individual level.

I don't know????
 
Originally posted by Texas Aggie
Is it OK for me to hold communion with my wife and son on Passover (in the privacy of our own home) since the church will not do such a thing?

Possibly, there are times when communion is not for the masses of "believers" and may need to be accomplished at an individual level.

I don't know????
Click to expand...

Matt,

The basic Biblical principle that I would enunciate is that the Lord's Supper is for His church, not private individuals (see WCF 29.4) and that it is to be administered by His elders, not private individuals. So I would not have the Lord's Supper in my home.
 
Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
That was the problem in the first place. When people stop trying to take my dignity away and make me the equivalent of a piece of trash, I will be humble.
Click to expand...
Sorry, Brian, but your comment reminded me of an unsuccessful attempt to get a point across to my youngest son. I was trying to instill in him the idea that if you studied real hard now and did well in school, you'd have more employment options when you get out of school. I told him otherwise he may end up collecting garbage or something...to which he responded "I heard they make pretty good money..."I wasn't sure how to respond, so it was basically..."never mind" :lol:

Hang in there, brother. Don't let the responses get you down.

[Edited on 8-31-2006 by blhowes]
 
Kevin,
What part of Passover is pagan?

Fred,
Why do we not have communion on Passover? Is this not the initiation of the New Covenant?
 
Originally posted by Texas Aggie


Fred,
Why do we not have communion on Passover? Is this not the initiation of the New Covenant?
Click to expand...

Matt,

We have no more need for days that commemorate the shadows, now that the substance is here. The Lord's Supper is a covenant meal for God's people, and is to be celebrated based on that and not only any particular occasion. If your church celebrated communion on teh Lord's Day near that time, there is no reason

My guess is that Kevin was using "pagan" because Passover belongs to the Old Covenant as a feast. Christ is now our Passover (1 Cor 5:7). I would not go so far as to call Passover "pagan" since it was instituted by God, but I do see that to go back to it is to fall back to the former things.

Does that help at all?
 
Fred,

Yes that helps. Thanks. How do you like Katy, TX? My wife and I are seriously considering moving there within the next year or two.

Matt
 
Originally posted by blhowes
Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
That was the problem in the first place. When people stop trying to take my dignity away and make me the equivalent of a piece of trash, I will be humble.
Click to expand...
Sorry, Brian, but your comment reminded me of an unsuccessful attempt to get a point across to my youngest son. I was trying to instill in him the idea that if you studied real hard now and did well in school, you'd have more employment options when you get out of school. I told him otherwise he may end up collecting garbage or something...to which he responded "I heard they make pretty good money..."I wasn't sure how to respond, so it was basically..."never mind" :lol:

Hang in there, brother. Don't let the responses get you down.

[Edited on 8-31-2006 by blhowes]
Click to expand...

Thanks brother. Your son left you speechless eh? :lol:
 
Originally posted by Texas Aggie
Fred,

Yes that helps. Thanks. How do you like Katy, TX? My wife and I are seriously considering moving there within the next year or two.

Matt
Click to expand...

We love it. It is a great area, with great resources, good neighborhoods, adn (we think) a great church. If you ever want to come looking up this way, let me know.
 
Fred, I am sorry. I hope you will forgive me.

All: I am sorry. When I feel I am being attacked I can be a downright jerk. I can be pretty merciless in what I say and almost always regret what I say later on. The more I pray about it the harder it gets. I guess I should not come on here or else just come on less than I do. Peace.
 
Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Fred, I am sorry. I hope you will forgive me.

All: I am sorry. When I feel I am being attacked I can be a downright jerk. I can be pretty merciless in what I say and almost always regret what I say later on. The more I pray about it the harder it gets. I guess I should not come on here or else just come on less than I do. Peace.
Click to expand...

Brian,

You are forgiven.

And I too am sorry about the initial post I made. I am especially sorry for teh "American sentimentality" remark.

Please forgive me.
 
Now, Brian, your apology would be complete if you would pray for the real best team in baseball, the Oakland As, instead of the Tigers :D

<ducking>
 
Originally posted by beej6
Now, Brian, your apology would be complete if you would pray for the real best team in baseball, the Oakland As, instead of the Tigers :D

<ducking>
Click to expand...

:lol: Will do.

Dear Lord,











I pray for that organization known as the Oakland A's. I pray they will win a few games for the sake of my brother's sanity. Just not against the Tigers. In Jesus' Name, :amen:

It's Gum time.
 
Matt, Since Passover has been done away with/replaced it is impossible to "celebrate" something that does not (in fact) exist.

What I mean is that a "historical existence" is more like a memory then an actual "thing". It is like the "relationship" I have with my great-grandfather (who I never met). I can think about him, I can read about him, I can talk to others about him, but I can not talk with him.

So you and your wife can talk about Passover, you can read about Passover, you can think about Passover, But you can NOT celebrate it. For the simple reason that it does not exist.

What I meant by pagan was 'idol worshiper". As St Paul warns in 1Cor 10, "Israel after the flesh" are in the same category as gentiles.

St Paul reminds the Corinthians that by eating & drinking Christs body & blood together they become/are "one body". He then points out that Israel after the flesh do the same thing in the festivals, that is they become "partakers of the alter" by "eating the sacrafice".

In verse 20 he makes clear that the object of all false worship are Devils. He then closes this section by reminding us that Devils are nothing compared to the true God but why would you tempt him?
 
Kevin,

Thanks for your reply. I am having a very difficult time finding where God has replaced His Passover with Easter. If anyone knows where this is, I would be very grateful to see it.

Passover may not exist for many; however, it exists for me (this is my faith). Easter does not exist for me and we do not observe it.

I suppose the main question is why have God´s Holy Days been abolished? Was this accomplished by God Himself or by man? Where has He changed His times and laws other than what He specifies in Hebrews (priesthood and sacrifices)? I can not see where He has abolished His holy days.

With this in mind (and back to the discussion on communion), if the church does not observe the feast days and we hold communion on Sundays as well as Christmas and Easter, then how am I to have communion on the days I consider sanctified unless I do this myself at an individual level?

I would be more concerned about the pagan influence and devil worship centered around Easter and Christmas than I would be about Passover. I still question 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and Matthew 12:38-40 as it relates to a Friday death and Sunday resurrection (it simply does not fit). As a result, I can not ignore the biblical facts concerning the matter and adhere to a human tradition that I was raised with.
 
<a href="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fwww.smileycentral.com%252F%253Fpartner%253DZSzeb008%255FZNxdm414YYUS%2526i%253D4%252F4%255F12%255F1%2526feat%253Dprof/page.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_12_1.gif" alt="SmileyCentral.com" border="0"><img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D4%252F4_12_1/image.gif"></a>

This thread seems to have gotten off on the proverbial rabbit trail.
 
Easter? Rabbit trail? :lol:

Communion at weddings...seems ok.

Celebrating Passover...what's wrong with that?

Celebrating Easter (Resurrection)...a wonderful thing to celebrate.

Unity in Christ...what we all have...whether we agree on the things above or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Romans922
  • Locked
Weddings/Funerals
Replies
0
Views
2K
Romans922
Romans922
Bladestunner316
  • Locked
Infant Communion
Replies
6
Views
2K
Puritanhead
P
Casey
  • Locked
Whence paedo-communion?
Replies
19
Views
2K
Scott Bushey
Scott Bushey
P
  • Locked
Communion (what type)?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Sailor
Reformed Covenanter
An orthodox church should not have heretics in her communion (James MacGregor)
Replies
8
Views
1K
Physeter
Physeter
Back
Top