Fencing off the Lord's Supper

Status
Not open for further replies.

arapahoepark

Puritan Board Professor
I found this rather bizarre article. Who Would Jesus Refuse to Eat With? (by Jeff Cook)
In it he advocates opening Lord's Supper to any and everyone, after ll Jesus ate with sinners, is his defense. The comments are interesting. Many disagree but the author says, 'prove it.' Others say that the Bible doesn't say much of anything of the fencing off the Lord's Supper.
Now, there is 1 Corinthians 11, what about other places?
 
The author of that article misses the point that the Supper is not an ordinary meal—"Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?" (1 Cor. 11:22)—but rather is a special meal that's a participation in the body and blood of Christ. Fencing the table is an act of kindness. We are helping all concerned, both the church and unbelievers, to have integrity before God. It should be explained that way when the Supper is served. My experience is that most unbelievers, rather than being miffed at their exclusion, appreciate the emphasis on integrity.

A proof-text approach is often not the best way to determine sound biblical practices. The Bible says much about kindness and integrity, and about the dangers of hypocrisy, and this combined with 1 Cor. 11 is why our practice is to fence the table.
 
"Taking the Lord's Supper in an Unworthy Manner

1 Corinthians 11 October 20, 2014 BQ021213 J.Macarthur

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly. (11:27–29)

Again Paul returns to warning. Because of all that is involved in the ordinance, whoever participates in the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. One can come to His table unworthily in many ways. It is common for people to participate in it ritualistically, without participating with their minds and hearts. They can go through the motions without going through any emotions, and treat it lightly rather than seriously. They can believe it imparts grace or merit, that the ceremony itself, rather than the sacrifice it represents, can save or keep one saved. Many come with a spirit of bitterness or hatred toward another believer, or come with a sin of which they will not repent. If a believer comes with anything less than the loftiest thoughts of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and anything less than total love for his brothers and sisters in Christ, he comes unworthily.

To come unworthily to the Lord’s table is to become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. To trample our country’s flag is not to dishonor a piece of cloth but to dishonor the country it represents. To come unworthily to Communion does not simply dishonor the ceremony; it dishonors the One in whose honor it is celebrated. We become guilty of dishonoring His body and blood, which represent His total gracious life and work for us, His suffering and death on our behalf. We become guilty of mocking and treating with indifference the very person of Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 7:52; Heb. 6:6; 10:29).

Every time he comes to the Lord’s Supper, therefore, a person should examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. Before we partake we are to give ourselves a thorough self–examination, looking honestly at our hearts for anything that should not be there and sifting out all evil. Our motives, our attitudes toward the Lord and His Word, toward His people, and toward the Communion service itself should all come under private scrutiny before the Lord. The table thus becomes a special place for the purifying of the church. That is a vital use of Communion, and Paul’s warning reinforces that ideal.

A person who partakes without coming in the right spirit eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly. Judgment (krima) here has the idea of chastisement. Because “there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1), the KJV rendering of damnation is especially unfortunate. The great difference in Paul’s use here of krima (judgment) and katakrima (condemned) is seen in verse 32, where it is clear that krima refers to discipline of the saved and katakrima refers to condemnation of the lost. That chastening comes if he does not judge the body rightly, that is, the blood and body used in Communion. To avoid God’s judgment, one must properly discern and respond to the holiness of the occasion. " J.Macarthur

I think we are protecting others by fencing off the Lords supper. I found this useful hope it helps you as well.
 
When we listen to a sermon we come as pupils to a tutor; when we pray we come
as children to a father; when we take communion we come and sit face to face, and
sup with Christ and He with us. Wish it was mine ,but I think Swinnock penned it!
 
By fencing the table the minister is not necessarily saying that those excluded are unbelievers.

Someone who shows clear signs of being a believer can be excluded if he falls into presumptuous sin, until he shows signs of repentance and reformation.

Fencing is just a way of saying that the Table of the Lord is not open or suitable for such people.

Without such measures, unconverted communicant members, unconverted ministers and liberal and other erroneous theology wait to swamp a denomination.
 
Can this guy prove that Christ or any of the apostles administered the Lord's Supper to non-covenetal members? or to unbeliever?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top