Word of Salvation – Vol. 35 No. 01 – January 1990

 

Who May Come To The Lord’s Table

 

(Participation in the Lord’s Supper concerns the whole church.)

 

Sermon by Rev. M. P. Geluk on Lord’s Day 30c Q&A 82.

Reading: 1Corinthians 11:17-34

 

The sacraments are very important to the Christian church.  The Lord has given them to the church as a means of grace.  That is to say, by using them the faith of the believer is strengthened.

Speaking now of the Lord’s Supper – with which Lord’s Day 30 is dealing – the eating of bread and the drinking of the fruit of the vine, portrays in a very clear way the believer’s faith feeding on Christ’s body and blood.  The Saviour gave His body and blood, as a sacrifice for sin, on the cross.  The repentant sinner is invited by God to see that sacrifice, and believe God when He declares that through the death of His Son, the sinner is cleansed, forgiven and pardoned of all his sins.  The Lord’s Supper, where the bread is broken and the wine poured out, gives the believer a very clear picture of what Christ did to bring about His salvation.  And when participating in the Supper, the believer is told to look to Christ and thus his faith in God who gives salvation is strengthened and nourished.

Now in the second half of Lord’s Day 30 the church asks: who may come to the Lord’s Table?  Having confessed how important the Lord’s Supper is and how much it is needed by the Christian believers, the church felt it necessary to ask and answer the question as to who may come.

All those who belong to Christ may come, of course.  After all, the Lord Himself instituted the sacraments for their benefit.  But as everyone knows, Christians are not perfect in themselves and it is quite possible to participate in a manner that is not glorifying to God.

Parents want their children to enjoy them and the things they provide for the children’s well-being.  But children can misbehave and dishonour their parents in all sorts of ways.  In order to restore a good relationship, parents may have to withhold certain privileges so that the child comes to his senses.  The Lord also has something to say about the way Christians love and serve Him.  That’s not for us to determine but for God to say how He wants it done.

And so in Q&A 82 the church confesses what she believes God’s Word to be saying about proper participation in the Lord’s Supper.  The church believes that the Word of God emphasizes individual responsibility.  That is to say, each believer must come and participate in the Supper but in a manner that shows a being sorry for sin, a trusting that for the sake of Christ there is forgiveness of sins, and a positive desire to lead a better life.

In short the believer himself must see to it that he or she knows his or her sin and is sorry for it, looks to Christ for forgiveness and renewal, and is whole-heartedly willing to serve the Lord with thankful obedience.

But that’s not all there is to it.  In Q&A 82 the church also confesses that God’s Word has something to say about the church’s responsibility.

Participation in the Lord’s Supper not only concerns the individual member of the church, it also concerns the church as a whole.  It is to this aspect that we must now look.

In the first place, what are some of these Scriptural indications that point to the church’s responsibility as to who may come to the Lord’s Table?

You know, of course, that there are those who say that it is not the business of the church at all to say anything about anyone wanting to come to the Lord’s Table.  They feel it is a matter between the Lord and the person.  The church is there to simply administer the Lord’s Supper and to give the general invitation and say that all who know and love the Lord are free to participate.  And whoever in the congregation hears that is to make up his or her own mind about it.  It’s their personal decision.

So strong are the feelings about this individual freedom that church supervision over the Lord’s Table remains a constant thorn in the flesh to all who are unhappy with it.

But what are we to make of those Scriptural indications that point to the whole covenant community being held responsible by God for what the individual member of that community does?  Of the many places in the Bible where this is taught, we shall only point to one instance in the Old Testament and to two in the New Testament.

In the Old Testament we have the sin of Achan (Josh.7).  Achan, one individual, sinned against God by keeping for himself some treasures from the possessions of the people of Jericho.  No one was allowed to on this occasion because God had instructed that everything in Jericho had to be destroyed.

Achan’s sin, therefore, was not so much a taking from the spoils of war, but a deliberate disobeying of God’s instructions.  But the point we are making here is that all of Israel was held responsible by God for the sin that was done by one individual among them.  There was disobedience among God’s covenant community and in His anger God took away His protective blessing and consequently in its next battle against Ai, Israel suffered badly in defeat.

From the New Testament we have the teaching of the Lord Jesus about the brother who sins against another brother (Matt.18:15ff).  The two Christian brothers are obliged to deal with the sin.  If this does not succeed, then others are to become involved.  It becomes a matter that concerns the church as a whole.  If the wrongdoer does not repent and refuses to listen even to the church then he or she is to be excommunicated.

It’s very clear that a Christian believer cannot say that his relationship with the Lord concerns only himself and the Lord.  It concerns the whole church as well.

What all this has to do with participation in the Lord’s Supper is clear from the letter of Paul to the Corinthian church (1Cor.11:17ff).  At their love feasts there was drunkenness, some went hungry, there were divisions.  Whilst these sins went on they partook of the Lord’s Supper.  Paul describes their participation as being unworthy.

Again, this sinful behaviour was not just the concern of the individual church member.  The church as a whole was held responsible.  They failed to judge themselves and consequently they came under the judgement of God.  Indeed, many in that church became weak and sick, some even died.

It must follow then, that the church which celebrates the Lord’s Supper is also responsible as to who comes to the Lord’s Table.  In fact, because the church is also a covenant community before God, there is nothing in that community where the individual church member can just do his or her own thing.  The church is the body of Christ and one part of the body cannot remain unconcerned about the condition of another part of the body.  It is true, the individual member has a personal responsibility to participate in the Lord’s Supper but it is also a concern of the whole church.

The whole church then is to be concerned with the personal life-styles of its members.  It involves the things the members say and do.  That means, therefore, doctrine and life.

No one can, of course, deal with the sins the members do in secret.  The hypocrite, if he is careful in his hypocrisy, will remain undetected.  The church cannot act here and must leave them to the Lord.  He, before whom nothing remains hidden and who sees and hears everything, will judge the hypocrite.  But some members of the church are not at all interested in wanting to hide a particular sin.  They will readily admit they are disobedient to God.

This is certainly better than to pretend there is nothing wrong.  It is still very sad, of course, that with the admission of disobedience there is not yet a real repentance.  The love for the sin is still stronger than the love for God.

In such situations the disobedient will often judge themselves as unworthy partakers of the Lord’s Supper and will voluntarily abstain from the sacrament.  They know that the Lord’s displeasure is upon them.  They know that the relationship with the Lord is broken because of sin.  Here the church has only to confirm the discipline the member has already imposed on himself.

But some members refuse to see that they are wrong and see no need to repent.  Here the church must say: but you are living in sin and you cannot participate in the Lord’s Supper until you break with the sin.

The church, of course, has to be very clear about the standards by which to declare the member unworthy of participation.  The danger of the church lording it over its members by unscriptural standards is very real.  Indeed, church members have sometimes complained that office-bearers are behaving like some kind of spiritual policemen.

But the fact of the matter is that it is not what the pastor thinks, or what the elder thinks, or even what you think; it is what the Lord Himself has said in His Word.  And the Word of God has something to say about respecting everyone else’s freedom in Christ (1Cor.10:23ff); Rom.14).

For example, many things can be said about smoking and drinking, what to wear, how to keep the Lord’s Day, what quality in entertainment, what to give to the Lord in offerings and pledges, and so on.  Christian people have their individual thoughts about these and other things and each member will back up his particular stand with scriptural texts.

But the church members will use their freedom according to their biblical convictions.  And members will even prefer one brother for office above another because of the convictions they happen to have.

Now because the Word of God respects the freedom of the individual Christian in certain matters, the church cannot work with a standard by which to admit or bar members from the Lord’s Table, that is more narrow than God’s Word is.  That would result in spiritual tyranny and no one benefits from that.

But if the Lord Himself has set a standard, then what is it?  Well, it is not the same for all situations of course.  The standard set for an office-bearer is higher than admission to the Lord’s Table.  For Lord’s Supper participation the church is obedient to Scripture when it requires from the members a life-style, and that includes doctrine and life, which is in harmony with a biblical confession of who the Lord is, and what He demands in our daily life and in all areas of life.

Church members need to know this standard for otherwise they do not know what to believe or how to behave.

You can see here that the church is helping its members when it spells out this Christian doctrine and life in its forms for the Lord’s Supper and in its confessional standards.  For the church to ignore the biblical teachings in its Forms and Confessions is to do so at its own peril.  Without a biblical standard to go by, a vacuum will be created.  And in that vacuum will come human standards.  These human standards will be made up by whatever happens to be popular at a given time.  The end-result will be a church where, not the Lord, but man is the judge.  And no one benefits from that either.

We have seen then that Scripture points to the responsibility of the church to admit or refuse members to the Lord’s Table, provided the church does that in a scriptural manner.

But now in the second and final place we must deal with the question: who does the actual supervising of the Lord’s Table in the church?

When Jesus began to celebrate the first Lord’s Supper with His disciples, then the Lord Himself saw to it that Judas was removed.  Indeed, it would have been unimaginable to have a disciple, who had agreed to betray His Lord, share with Christ in a meal that began to mean a sharing in His death and resurrection.

Before He returned to His Father in heaven, Jesus delegated His authority in the church to the disciples (Mat.16:18,19).  But not just to the disciples as individual persons but to them as those who were mandated to teach and preach His Word.

And when in the process of time the disciples who had become apostles died, then we find the New Testament telling us that before they died, the apostles appointed elders in every church to supervise the flock (Acts 20:28).  But the authority of overseers, delegated to them by Christ the Head of the Church, would only be valid when they truly represented the truth of the Word of God.

Not according to their own insight or fancy, could they open and shut the kingdom, but only with the official keys, given to them by Christ.

Now if the elders of the church are called to be overseers and to supervise the flock, then it would be rather strange if the Lord’s Supper was the one thing where they just had to let the members of the church make up their own mind.

And when we look at the current issue of children at the Lord’s Table, then we can see that here too the elders of the church have to exercise supervision.  When adult members of the church are expected to have a Christian life-style before they can be admitted to the Lord’s Table, then you cannot ask for a different standard for children.

It certainly would not do to insist that Christians be Christian indeed, as the New Testament does, when partaking of the Lord’s Supper, and then to hold that children could be admitted simply because they happen to be covenant children.  Nor would it do if their believing parents were to vouch for their children.

The authority for anyone’s admittance lies not with parents but with the elders.

And it’s incorrect to say that covenant children in the New Testament ought to be partakers of the Lord’s Supper just because children in the Old Testament were part of the Passover meal.  Whilst the Lord’s Supper came in the place of the Passover, it cannot be said that the two feasts are the same in every detail.  There are too many significant differences as is clear from the fact that the New Testament church is quite different in many ways from Old Testament Israel.

Nor can it be argued that because covenant children receive baptism, they ought also to receive Holy Communion.  The two sacraments have many similarities but there are also significant differences.

Are covenant children then not to be admitted at all to the Lord’s Supper?

It is really the wrong question to ask.  The issue facing the church is not whether, or for how long the young baptised members of the church, (yes, they are members also) should be kept away from the Lord’s Table.  Rather, the question is how and how soon covenant children may be admitted to the Lord’s Table.

As to the “how”, the church has said that a profession of faith ought to be made first.  It got that idea from Scripture also.  The church should maintain that requirement for anyone regardless of age.  A person ought to be invited to participate upon a credible profession of faith when he or she is spiritually ready to do so.  They must be able to examine themselves in the manner of Answer 81 of the Catechism (read).

That answer clearly reflects the spiritual requirements of being able to know what true repentance involves; to know how Christ’s suffering and death are all sufficient, and to know how to be thankfully obedient to God’s will for daily life.

But at what age will that be?  Well, it is obvious that an infant or a very young child cannot exercise what requires some spiritual maturity.  But, neither need it be an automatic thing that covenant children must be in their late teens or early twenties, or have fully completed all the years of catechism training.

When they are spiritually ready for it!  That is the criterion.  And we should not be too quick to put an age to this.  Some covenant children may be spiritually ready before they have completed the normal number of catechism years.  In their early or middle teens they may be spiritually ready to credibly profess their faith in Christ in the manner of Answer 81.

This need not mean that the catechism years have to stop.  They can happily keep on learning.  Come to think of it, many church members who have professed their faith, could benefit from some on-going solid catechism instruction.

When we now in conclusion mention new Christians and guests to the Lord’s table, then the main things have been said already.

The church is not asking too much if it insists that new converts are first to reach that point where they too they too are also spiritually ready for participation in the Lord’s Supper.  Of course they are not expected to know everything.  But what the church expects its young members to know, can also be expected from new Christians.  The church cannot really expect to be spiritually healthy if new Christians remain spiritually ignorant.

With regard to guests, it is important that everyone realises that the elders do not pass judgement on them.  The fact is that when the guest is a stranger, then that guest is simply not known to be anything but a stranger.  The elders cannot very well conduct a quick and intensive enquiry just before the worship service to see if the guest can be admitted to the Lord’s Table.  That would not really constitute a New Testament type of welcome.  But the church has every right to simply ask if the guest wishes to participate and if so, put down the condition that the guest must be a communicant or confirmed member in full standing in his or her own church, and that he or she is a sincere believer of fundamentally the same faith as our church holds to and living a Christian life.  If the guest is known to some members of our church and they can testify that these conditions are met, then so much the better.

And what is the object of all this supervision with regard to the Lord’s Table?  In the negative sense it is not to be judged by the Lord, as the Corinthian church was.  In the positive sense, it is to be obedient to the Lord in the way He wants His church to be.  It is to glorify Him in all things, also with the Lord’s Supper.  It is to love those who are invited to come to the Lord’s Table, to have them spiritually ready for it.  And it is to rejoice together in the breaking of the bread, knowing that we share the same Lord and the same faith, and that He lovingly cares for all who sit at His table strengthening one and all with the riches of His wonderful salvation.

AMEN