Taking communion in an unreformed church?

[Knight George]

I've been a Christian for decades, and have been going to an evangelical free church since college. My church officially holds to view of "majoring on the majors and minoring on the minors of Christianity" (meaning they would be willing to die for the foundational basics of Scripture, but leave it up to the convictions of the individual on what they deem minor ex. Calvinism/Arminianism and other theological stances).

I'm a Calvinist theology nerd that is always reading a Puritan book or diving into Calvin's Institutes. Over the past few years, I've moved farther and father in this direction to the point I much more closely identify with a rather strict view of the Westminster Standards than I do with the "major on the majors and minor on the minors" stance of my Evangelical Free church (I'm starting to become concerned this view is unbiblical and dangerous).

I've done a thorough search of churches within 1.5 hours of my town, and cannot find a reformed church that is in line with my deeply studied/prayed over convictions. My church took communion this past Sunday, and I'm starting to become concerned I should not be taking it with them since my deep convictions have become so different than my Evangelical Free church (especially in regards to the regulative principal).

Should I still be taking communion at my longstanding church home which which I now theologically disagree on many points? If not, how do I practice the sacrament of the Lord's Supper with no reformed churches I can physically attend?

Thank you

 

[aaronsk]

What is their doctrine of the supper?

 

[danekristjan]

I've been a Christian for decades, and have been going to an evangelical free church since college. My church officially holds to view of "majoring on the majors and minoring on the minors of Christianity" (meaning they would be willing to die for the foundational basics of Scripture, but leave it up to the convictions of the individual on what they deem minor ex. Calvinism/Arminianism and other theological stances).

I'm a Calvinist theology nerd that is always reading a Puritan book or diving into Calvin's Institutes. Over the past few years, I've moved farther and father in this direction to the point I much more closely identify with a rather strict view of the Westminster Standards than I do with the "major on the majors and minor on the minors" stance of my Evangelical Free church (I'm starting to become concerned this view is unbiblical and dangerous).

I've done a thorough search of churches within 1.5 hours of my town, and cannot find a reformed church that is in line with my deeply studied/prayed over convictions. My church took communion this past Sunday, and I'm starting to become concerned I should not be taking it with them since my deep convictions have become so different than my Evangelical Free church (especially in regards to the regulative principal).

Should I still be taking communion at my longstanding church home which which I now theologically disagree on many points? If not, how do I practice the sacrament of the Lord's Supper with no reformed churches I can physically attend?

Thank you

Are they are Christian church? There is your answer. Recall your reading of Calvin on the church.

 

[Jake]

Looking at your profile, you appear to be near where my wife grew up. There is certainly a dearth of Reformed churches. I would say you're effectively excommunicating yourself if you cannot take communion at the church you're at, so if you cannot become comfortable you should be making plans to figure out how to get a church planted or to move to where there is a church.

That said, if I find myself on the Lord's Day where there is not a Reformed church, I am willing personally to participate in worship as far as I am able, including taking communion, at non-Reformed churches. For me this has included Anglican and Baptist churches. I once visited a Lutheran church and did not partake because I was not allowed with my beliefs.

 

[DanSSwing]

I wouldn't have any problem taking communion at a church that was actually Christian, but when people say, "Major on the majors and minor on the minors," more and more, what I'm hearing is, "Give me milk and not solid food."

 

[danekristjan]

I wouldn't have any problem taking communion at a church that was actually Christian, but when people say, "Major on the majors and minor on the minors," more and more, what I'm hearing is, "Give me milk and not solid food."

Is "give me milk and not solid food" a sentiment that revokes the reality of one's Christianity?

 

[RamistThomist]

I would want to know more of the specifics of the church in question. We can probably safely rule out Lutheran churches, since I doubt they would commune non-Lutherans (although I suspect some do).

 

[Jake]

I would want to know more of the specifics of the church in question. We can probably safely rule out Lutheran churches, since I doubt they would commune non-Lutherans (although I suspect some do).

He says EFree. EFree has Lutheran Pietist roots but they're probably closer to Baptist-style memoralist view of the sacraments in most churches today.

 

[Redneck_still_Reforming]

I am at an EFCA church as well. I asked for there constitution, statement of faith, and the explanation of their view of the sacraments. I have recently had the same question because at my church the entire fencing strategy is "if you dont believe, let it pass you by" without enforcement other than personal conscience.

The "major and minor" doctrine, officially called the "significance of silence," can be found expounded upon in the book "Evangelical Convictions" published by the EFCA. I disagree with the doctrinal formulation as it is used to allow calvinist/arminians to be together, paedo/credo to be together, etc. If those are important doctrines (ex. arminianism is heresy according to Dordt and the Reformers so how can it be in a true church as a legitimate doctrinal stance), then we shouldn't be silent but preach the Word with confidence rather than meekness.

I will say, in the end, I still take communion. I justify it by saying it is between the Lord and I and because He, through the pastor, administers the sacrament (not men) then I can partake. I dont know if that way of thinking is right, feel free to criticize it if it denies a reformed distinctive. It is a tricky issue so I recommend prayer, prayer, prayer, and Scripture.

 

[Redneck_still_Reforming]

He says EFree. EFree has Lutheran Pietist roots but they're probably closer to Baptist-style memoralist view of the sacraments in most churches today.

I think of EFree as Southern Baptist but Midwest version

 

[retroGRAD3]

I think of EFree as Southern Baptist but Midwest version

This is an interesting way of putting it. I tend to agree.

 

[Knight George]

Hi everyone, thanks so much for your guidance! Based on your feedback, let me provide a bit more information. I recently read How to Serve God in Private and Public Worship by John Jackson. Jackson taught if a person receives communion with a brother/sister who is knowingly or unknowingly practicing unrepentant sin (and does not lovingly bring this sin to their attention beforehand) is guilty of taking the Supper in an unworthy manner as well. Jackson makes the case by taking Communion with someone in this way, you are actually communing with them in their sin and not showing them proper Christian love (therefore making yourself guilty).

While preparing for the Lord's Supper, I looked up at the worship team with their instruments and neon stage lights (regulative principal concerns) and large picture of Jesus on the jumbotron (second commandment concern) and thought of what I had just meditated on from John Jackson's book. That's what prompted this post. How would I call out such a large church over one of their denomination's flagship doctrines? Most would be very confused if I even mentioned my concern.

p.s. My church practices open table Communion (If you're not a Christian, let it pass by) with a memorialist view.
I'm not trying to drag down my church at all. It's a loving biblical community that strives to please God. The pandemic lockdowns provided the opportunity for me to experience reformed church services for the first time, and do a lot of reformed reading. Now I am working through what to do with what I've learned. Thank you!

 

[Redneck_still_Reforming]

Hi everyone, thanks so much for your guidance! Based on your feedback, let me provide a bit more information. I recently read How to Serve God in Private and Public Worship by John Jackson. Jackson taught if a person receives communion with a brother/sister who is knowingly or unknowingly practicing unrepentant sin (and does not lovingly bring this sin to their attention beforehand) is guilty of taking the Supper in an unworthy manner as well. Jackson makes the case by taking Communion with someone in this way, you are actually communing with them in their sin and not showing them proper Christian love (therefore making yourself guilty).

While preparing for the Lord's Supper, I looked up at the worship team with their instruments and neon stage lights (regulative principal concerns) and large picture of Jesus on the jumbotron (second commandment concern) and thought of what I had just meditated on from John Jackson's book. That's what prompted this post. How would I call out such a large church over one of their denomination's flagship doctrines? Most would be very confused if I even mentioned my concern.

p.s. My church practices open table Communion (If you're not a Christian, let it pass by) with a memorialist view.
I'm not trying to drag down my church at all. It's a loving biblical community that strives to please God. The pandemic lockdowns provided the opportunity for me to experience reformed church services for the first time, and do a lot of reformed reading. Now I am working through what to do with what I've learned. Thank you!

I would also like to hear an answer to this. I can see both ways but still would take communion.

 

[De Jager]

Sounds like it's time to join a reformed church.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Hi everyone, thanks so much for your guidance! Based on your feedback, let me provide a bit more information. I recently read How to Serve God in Private and Public Worship by John Jackson. Jackson taught if a person receives communion with a brother/sister who is knowingly or unknowingly practicing unrepentant sin (and does not lovingly bring this sin to their attention beforehand) is guilty of taking the Supper in an unworthy manner as well. Jackson makes the case by taking Communion with someone in this way, you are actually communing with them in their sin and not showing them proper Christian love (therefore making yourself guilty).

While preparing for the Lord's Supper, I looked up at the worship team with their instruments and neon stage lights (regulative principal concerns) and large picture of Jesus on the jumbotron (second commandment concern) and thought of what I had just meditated on from John Jackson's book. That's what prompted this post. How would I call out such a large church over one of their denomination's flagship doctrines? Most would be very confused if I even mentioned my concern.

p.s. My church practices open table Communion (If you're not a Christian, let it pass by) with a memorialist view.
I'm not trying to drag down my church at all. It's a loving biblical community that strives to please God. The pandemic lockdowns provided the opportunity for me to experience reformed church services for the first time, and do a lot of reformed reading. Now I am working through what to do with what I've learned. Thank you!

The first paragraph sounds like straight-up Donatism. The Reformed reject such ludicrous purity-spiralling. It would make it impossible for us to take communion literally anywhere where we to follow that idea through to its logical conclusion. It is one thing to say that church officers have a responsibility to bar the scandalous from the Lord's Table, but an entirely different thing to say that members should absent themselves from the Lord's Supper on account of others "knowingly or unknowingly practicing unrepentant sin".

 

[CathH]

The first paragraph sounds like straight-up Donatism. The Reformed reject such ludicrous purity-spiralling. It would make it impossible for us to take communion literally anywhere where we to follow that idea through to its logical conclusion. It is one thing to say that church officers have a responsibility to bar the scandalous from the Lord's Table, but an entirely different thing to say that members should absent themselves from the Lord's Supper on account of others "knowingly or unknowingly practicing unrepentant sin".

Entirely agree with this. Paul says, "Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat..." If *you* are practicing unrepentant sin, *you* are communicating unworthily. But if *someone else* is or may be communicating unworthily, that does not mean that you are partaking unworthily.

 

[yeutter]

Plover Wisconsin looks to be about half way between Gresham to the North, Oshkosh to the East, and Randolph to the South.
Conservative Presbyterian or Reformed congregations exist in those communities. If I was in your position, I would ask the pastors of those churches if they knew of a Reformed congregation or contacts near you.

 

[aaronsk]

There are a number of folks who travel from the Waupaca area to Apple Valley OPC every Lord’s day to gather with the saints. Perhaps reach out to Pastor Hartley. Even if you choose not to attend at Apple Valley he may have some godly wisdom and knows the church landscape in that area. Ive heard some talk of there possibly being a plant near the Point area in the future. You can get his email or call the church to contact him here.

https://applevalleypres.org/

 

[Sovereign Grace]

I've been a Christian for decades, and have been going to an evangelical free church since college. My church officially holds to view of "majoring on the majors and minoring on the minors of Christianity" (meaning they would be willing to die for the foundational basics of Scripture, but leave it up to the convictions of the individual on what they deem minor ex. Calvinism/Arminianism and other theological stances).

I'm a Calvinist theology nerd that is always reading a Puritan book or diving into Calvin's Institutes. Over the past few years, I've moved farther and father in this direction to the point I much more closely identify with a rather strict view of the Westminster Standards than I do with the "major on the majors and minor on the minors" stance of my Evangelical Free church (I'm starting to become concerned this view is unbiblical and dangerous).

I've done a thorough search of churches within 1.5 hours of my town, and cannot find a reformed church that is in line with my deeply studied/prayed over convictions. My church took communion this past Sunday, and I'm starting to become concerned I should not be taking it with them since my deep convictions have become so different than my Evangelical Free church (especially in regards to the regulative principal).

Should I still be taking communion at my longstanding church home which which I now theologically disagree on many points? If not, how do I practice the sacrament of the Lord's Supper with no reformed churches I can physically attend?

Thank you

Seeing that communion is between you and God, I do not see anything wrong with taking communion with them.

 

[Andres]

You need to relocate so you can be a member of a biblical, reformed church. Seriously. We move for jobs and schools and homes and all manner of reasons but rarely do I see Christians relocating for the purpose of worship, which is actually our chief end.
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." - Matt 6:33

 

[aaronsk]

Seeing that communion is between you and God, I do not see anything wrong with taking communion with them.

Perhaps folks with more wisdom and I can speak to this but it seems off to me. Is it not so that the Supper is taken in communion with the congregation and not in a closet as is your secret prayers? If you believe something quite different about the very substance of what the supper is would it not be misleading to the brothers & sisters to partake with them? I ask these questions genuinely.

WCF 29.1
1. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his Church, unto the end of the world; for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death, the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.a

a. 1 Cor 10:16-17, 21; 11:23-26; 12:13.

---

To the OP:
If you believe this church to be a true church then perhaps this isn't as strong a concern. Currently we are transitioning from a non-denomination to a reformed church (Apple Valley OPC ~ 40 min drive for us). So my thoughts and questions above things my family have been thinking through too. We have also considered the marks of a true church which may or may not increase your concerns.

Mark 1: Sound Doctrine
Mark 2: Right Administration of the Sacraments
Mark 3: The Right Administration of Discipline

 

[danekristjan]

Perhaps folks with more wisdom and I can speak to this but it seems off to me. Is it not so that the Supper is taken in communion with the congregation and not in a closet as is your secret prayers? If you believe something quite different about the very substance of what the supper is would it not be misleading to the brothers & sisters to partake with them? I ask these questions genuinely.

WCF 29.1
1. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his Church, unto the end of the world; for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death, the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.a

a. 1 Cor 10:16-17, 21; 11:23-26; 12:13.

---

To the OP:
If you believe this church to be a true church then perhaps this isn't as strong a concern. Currently we are transitioning from a non-denomination to a reformed church (Apple Valley OPC ~ 40 min drive for us). So my thoughts and questions above things my family have been thinking through too. We have also considered the marks of a true church which may or may not increase your concerns.

Mark 1: Sound Doctrine
Mark 2: Right Administration of the Sacraments
Mark 3: The Right Administration of Discipline

29.1 actually makes it crystal clear that it would NOT be misleading. True believers, even with all their misunderstandings and doctrinal errors, ARE united to Christ. The Lords Supper is a bond and pledge of that, even if those brothers sitting with you are mistaken on the true nature Of the supper. I wonder how many members in our reformed churches, if you asked them to explain the Lord's Supper, would give either an incorrect or severely deficient explanation? My time as a reformed minister leads me to believe the the number would be much higher than we'd like (even under the best preaching ministry). Yet, we partake the supper in our reformed churches with our reformed brethren who have many misunderstandings of the supper. How many in our reformed churches come to the supper thinking primarily of their own sin and unworthiness rather than Christ's sacrifice and mercy? Yet we partake with them. It is a very dangerous road to walk down, thinking that unless those around you have a perfect understanding of doctrine, then we cannot partake with them in the supper. What we are saying by doing so is that those myriads of confused and ignorant souls who have, in true faith, bowed the knee to Jesus Christ, have been washed by his blood, filled with his spirit, and united to his body, are actually not members of Christ.

 

[danekristjan]

Perhaps folks with more wisdom and I can speak to this but it seems off to me. Is it not so that the Supper is taken in communion with the congregation and not in a closet as is your secret prayers? If you believe something quite different about the very substance of what the supper is would it not be misleading to the brothers & sisters to partake with them? I ask these questions genuinely.

WCF 29.1
1. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his Church, unto the end of the world; for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death, the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.a

a. 1 Cor 10:16-17, 21; 11:23-26; 12:13.

---

To the OP:
If you believe this church to be a true church then perhaps this isn't as strong a concern. Currently we are transitioning from a non-denomination to a reformed church (Apple Valley OPC ~ 40 min drive for us). So my thoughts and questions above things my family have been thinking through too. We have also considered the marks of a true church which may or may not increase your concerns.

Mark 1: Sound Doctrine
Mark 2: Right Administration of the Sacraments
Mark 3: The Right Administration of Discipline

However, I most certainly agree with your assessment that communion is NOT Simply something between us and God. This is a severe misunderstanding of the supper, yet we would no doubt partake of the LS with the brother who just wrote that.

 

[danekristjan]

To the OP's concerns directly, while you can acknowledge the true Christianity of this church, and can partake of the supper, it really seems like your theological persuasions bring you to a place where it is time to find a reformed congregation, even if that means moving. Two things can be true, that this church, while ignorant, is a true church, AND, that there are enough defining doctrines differed upon to warrant separating.

 

[aaronsk]

29.1 actually makes it crystal clear that it would NOT be misleading. True believers, even with all their misunderstandings and doctrinal errors, ARE united to Christ. The Lords Supper is a bond and pledge of that, even if those brothers sitting with you are mistaken on the true nature Of the supper. I wonder how many members in our reformed churches, if you asked them to explain the Lord's Supper, would give either an incorrect or severely deficient explanation? My time as a reformed minister leads me to believe the the number would be much higher than we'd like (even under the best preaching ministry). Yet, we partake the supper in our reformed churches with our reformed brethren who have many misunderstandings of the supper. How many in our reformed churches come to the supper thinking primarily of their own sin and unworthiness rather than Christ's sacrifice and mercy? Yet we partake with them. It is a very dangerous road to walk down, thinking that unless those around you have a perfect understanding of doctrine, then we cannot partake with them in the supper. What we are saying by doing so is that those myriads of confused and ignorant souls who have, in true faith, bowed the knee to Jesus Christ, have been washed by his blood, filled with his spirit, and united to his body, are actually not members of Christ.

Thanks for expanding and putting fourth some answers to the questions I posed! For me, one question remains. If the church having a different doctrine of the supper (memorial, consub, transub, or whatever) reason enough to withhold from participating, not speaking of where some brothers in the congregation may have faulty doctrine, but the actual doctrine of the church affirms an erroneous view? This is where its a bit muddy for me yet at least with the non-romish views such as memorial view. I lumped them together as although the romish views are probably a more serious error than the memorial view (and rome is not a true church) they are all different from the "reformed" or Westminster view. Look forward to your throughts.

However, I most certainly agree with your assessment that communion is NOT Simply something between us and God. This is a severe misunderstanding of the supper, yet we would no doubt partake of the LS with the brother who just wrote that.

Agreed!

To the OP's concerns directly, while you can acknowledge the true Christianity of this church, and can partake of the supper, it really seems like your theological persuasions bring you to a place where it is time to find a reformed congregation, even if that means moving. Two things can be true, that this church, while ignorant, is a true church, AND, that there are enough defining doctrines differed upon to warrant separating.

Again, agreed!

 

[Sovereign Grace]

Perhaps folks with more wisdom and I can speak to this but it seems off to me. Is it not so that the Supper is taken in communion with the congregation and not in a closet as is your secret prayers? If you believe something quite different about the very substance of what the supper is would it not be misleading to the brothers & sisters to partake with them? I ask these questions genuinely.

WCF 29.1
1. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his Church, unto the end of the world; for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death, the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.a

a. 1 Cor 10:16-17, 21; 11:23-26; 12:13.

---

To the OP:
If you believe this church to be a true church then perhaps this isn't as strong a concern. Currently we are transitioning from a non-denomination to a reformed church (Apple Valley OPC ~ 40 min drive for us). So my thoughts and questions above things my family have been thinking through too. We have also considered the marks of a true church which may or may not increase your concerns.

Mark 1: Sound Doctrine
Mark 2: Right Administration of the Sacraments
Mark 3: The Right Administration of Discipline

What I meant is that communion is where each person examines themselves and not another. I know some ppl, in fact some of my own ppl, who would not take communion if someone was there who was divorced and remarried.

BTW, I agree with the WCF on this as well. But one should not divorce themselves from the Lord's table because of who is there beside them. That is the point I was making. Sorry about not making myself clearer.

 

[Knight George]

Hi everyone, I'm deeply grateful for all the insight and believe I have a biblical path forward on the Lord's Supper. Thank you! Although I've been reading Reformed works for years, I wasn't grasping the full scope of the message until now. I'm very willing to move for a solid Reformed church, but have just started this journey and am still learning the basics. I need to be sure I can align with the requirements of church membership before making such a move. I pray to reach that place speedily!

 

[timfost]

I need to be sure I can align with the requirements of church membership before making such a move. I pray to reach that place speedily!

I can't speak for all reformed churches, but even some of the most conservative do not require subscription to the reformed confessions (this is a requirement for officers to one degree or another, depending on the denomination). I would think that if you can affirm the Apostles' Creed you could join most reformed churches as a member.

Lastly, I would wholeheartedly support anyone finding a reformed church, but encourage you to also realize God's provision to you at the EFree church, even with some of their problems (I don't doubt that you see his provision there). Receive the good and be gracious with the rest. The Spirit abides in us, his temple. When we consider his presence in the filth we call ourselves, I think we should be overcome with grace in the assembly of saints, even when they are not reformed.