Please note: this paper was written for a specific context, within an academic class. The views of the article may or may not reflect my own arguments or the theology of the ELCA. This is simply one argument in the midst of many. Please feel free to let me know what your own opinions are!
In an effort to be a more hospitable and missional Church, communion invitations (verbal and written) within the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America should be changed from “all baptized people” to “all people.” There are two ways this thesis will be approached: theologically and practically. Although tradition has dictated that communicants be baptized, there is little theological and biblical evidence for the restriction. Practically, opening the table to unbaptized members publicly can serve as an evangelical tool as well as create greater ease within the parish. Although communion before baptism should not be the regular practice, changing the invitation would be more inclusive in terms of mission and hospitality.
Here it should be reiterated that the main point of this essay is not to normalize the practice of unbaptized people receiving communion. It simply argues that a more welcoming invitation will provide opportunities for hospitality and mission while not disregarding the sacristy of Holy Communion. Tradition states that people should be baptized before receiving Holy Communion. Lutherans understand that welcoming people into the Body of Christ involves welcoming them into the baptismal waters as well as the Lord’s Table. The pastor should follow up with a communicant in the week following the service (as they are likely to be visitors, not long-time members) and ask if they are baptized or interested in being baptized. If the pastor discovers that they are not baptized, they should be encouraged to come to educational opportunities in the church about both baptism and communion. In this way, an open invitation to communion is actually a form of evangelism.
The church recognizes that it is possible and, in some cases, common for people to take communion without being baptized. The main defense for baptism being the prerequisite for communion is that baptism is the initial profession of faith (which occurs once) and communion is the ongoing, continual, and repeated renewal of faith. In fact, the Use and Means of Grace states that “admission to the sacrament is by invitation of the Lord, presented through the Church to those who are baptized,” without further explanation as to why it is only presented to the baptized. The section goes on to explain that
when an unbaptized person comes to the table seeking Christ’s presence and is inadvertently communed, neither that person nor the ministers of Communion need be ashamed. Rather, Christ’s gift of love and mercy to all is praised. That person is invited to learn the faith of the Church, be baptized, and thereafter faithfully receive Holy Communion.
Therefore, we understand that it is by no means a sin nor will someone be damned by taking or administering communion before being baptized.
According to Use and Means of Grace, the only other recommendation for communion is that a person properly prepare to receive the body and blood of Christ. This preparation comes in the form of individual or corporate confession and forgiveness. This practice comes from Paul’s request to the Corinthians to “examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup.” In general practice, anyone receiving communion will have been a part of the confession and forgiveness at the beginning of the service. Therefore, unbaptized persons should not be withheld from receiving communion because they have actively participated in the recommendation to properly prepare to receive the body and blood of Christ.
Theologically speaking, the Church is not who invites people to the communion table. It is “by invitation of the Lord” that any of us are able to receive Holy Communion. It is only through God’s incredible saving mercy and grace that we are welcomed to share this meal with Christ. God desires everyone to be a part of the Body of Christ, so if participation in the eucharist leads to baptism, then it cannot be working against God’s will.
The Large Catechism, from which we glean much of our tradition, states that it is not our worthiness or unworthiness that makes the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ Jesus. Luther goes on to state that
Christ does not say “if you believe or if you are worthy, you have my body and blood,” but rather, “Take, eat and drink, this is my body and blood.” Likewise, when he says “Do this” (namely, what I do now do, what I institute, what I give you and bid you take), this is as much as to say, “No matter whether you are worthy or unworthy, you have here his body and blood by the power of these words that are connected to the bread and wine.”
Luther points out that Christ says, “This is my body and blood, given for you” (his emphasis). This means that no matter the person, Christ is addressing all people who hear these words and believe them to be true. Luther claims that “the treasure is opened and placed at everyone’s door.” In this way, we simply cannot limit Holy Communion to baptized people.
We see from the Large Catechism that despite what practices are carried out voluntarily or involuntarily, we hold that “this blessed sacrament remain unimpaired and inviolate even if we use and handle it unworthily.” We can go forward into new frontiers assured that the sacristy of Holy Communion is not affected by our own actions or differing practices.
To move to more practical reasons why the verbal and written invitation to the Lord’s table should be inclusive, we will reposition ourselves into a missional mindset. Practically speaking, in any given congregation, there is no way of telling who is and is not baptized when they approach the table. We will not stop people from coming forward if they hunger and thirst for Christ. In fact, Luther says that it is their privilege to come forward if and when they thirst. A friend served communion at their wedding and invited everyone to come forward. A couple near the front of the church were atheist and Jewish, but were invited to the table as well. That is a sign of the Holy Spirit working in wonderful, graceful ways through the Lord’s meal. As many invitations now stand (stating that all baptized people are invited to the table), they could cause visitors, de-churched people, and unchurched people to feel ostracized during the sharing of the meal. It can close off people from hearing the gospel when they realize that they are not invited to this wonderful meal. We are representatives of Christ, and to many people, not being welcomed by the church translates to not being welcomed by Christ. Paul argues that we should be mindful not to “cause our neighbors to stumble” (Romans 14:13-23; 1 Corinthians 8:13). If an exclusive invitation to the Lord’s table causes people to stumble in their faith or growing faith, then it should be changed for the sake of the Gospel.
There are two main reasons a person may be opposed to a more open invitation to communion. The first is that the pastor must follow up with visitors on a regular, intentional basis and ask about things such as baptism. To this, it should be said that visits are a part of the pastor’s vocation. The pastor should be constantly reaching out to visitors and having faithful conversations with them regarding their beliefs and religious backgrounds.
The second piece of opposition may be more serious. People could argue that allowing anyone to come for communion will devalue or misconstrue the sanctity of the meal. As previously stated, we do not cause or detract from the sacristy of the Lord’s meal. It is God’s graciousness and mercy that makes the meal an expression of, not a prerequisite for, God’s grace. Where people might get the wrong idea about what the eucharist means, we will emphasize that education must follow and continue throughout the lives of all congregants. Preparation of the heart and mind is necessary for the true reception of Holy Communion.
We see from these arguments that there is no biblically or theologically grounded opposition that should keep churches from changing their invitation language to be more inclusive. In fact, keeping in mind the theological implications and emphasis on hospitality, churches should be encouraged to change their verbal and written invitation to communion to an inclusive statement about “all people” being invited to the Lord’s table. This change should occur with prayerful consideration of the context as well as an understanding that communing non baptized people should not be a regular practice, but a gateway to starting a conversation with visitors about baptism and communion. Education outside of Sunday morning worship is especially necessary as we open the table to all people.
Sources:
Use and Means of Grace: A Statement on the Practice of Word and Sacrament, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, (Augsburg Fortress: Minneapolis, MN, 1997).
Kolb, Robert, Timothy J. Wenger, and Charles P. Arand. The Book of Concord: the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church: Large Catechism. (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2000), V.
No comments:
Post a Comment