Attack Gates
Communion is coming up this Sunday and no one has brought that topic up yet, so I'm going to. Why not right? But first I've got to tell y'all about the attack gate. I'll keep it short, though, because according to Josh I say way to much on my blog and no one reads it anyway. So ok, I'm down near hangar 6 (the main flight ops hangar) and my student and I are standing in the parking lot lamenting the fact that another good flying day is passing us by and he once again wasn't able to fly. While I'm standing there talking to him, this firetruck pulls up to a automatic gate in the chain link fence, the gate goes up and the firetruck starts going through. Nothing unusual they go out and practice in corners of the airport all the time. Now this gate is kind of weird; a whole segment of the fence hinges up on one side and swings up and out of the way. As the firetruck was passing slowly through the gate, it began to lower onto the side of the truck. As soon as the gate hits the truck, they stop as if to get out and asses the situation. At this point both my student and I had turned to watch and were just kind chuckling at the situation. Next thing we know, whoever was driving the truck gets back on the gas and continues forward with the gate scraping down the side of the truck, rupturing some line on the truck that started shooting fluid straight up and bending the gate way back. I think I said something like "well that was interesting" and I know I was glad I wasn't the one that had to explain that one. Your tax dollars at work.
Alright, Communion. It's really not that controversial and I'm not going to make an exhaustive list of my view points here, but it might be interesting to discuss. I don't even know if anyone disagrees with me. Communion is a continual public reminder of the sacrifice Christ has made for us as well as the commitment we have made to Christ. Not too many people debate why we have communion, so I'll just skip to open vs. closed communion because that seems to be the gray area for alot of people. The Idea of closed communion is to prevent those that aren't in Christ and a part of the body of believers from bringing trouble onto themselves by participating in communion and suffering the consequences, which it is made clear in the bible exist. This is done by the session of the church talking to whoever wants to join in the communion celebration to make certain that they are in a position to do so. If it is found that they are good to go, they are "invited" to the communion table. This is done as opposed to open communion were someone not meeting the requirements to join in communion could unknowingly bring punishment onto themselves. I'm really sorry if all this seems kind of scattered, but I'm down here at the airport with no bible and just writing what I wrote kind of off the cuff. So I reserve the right to revise this later. Let me know what y'all think.
Alright, Communion. It's really not that controversial and I'm not going to make an exhaustive list of my view points here, but it might be interesting to discuss. I don't even know if anyone disagrees with me. Communion is a continual public reminder of the sacrifice Christ has made for us as well as the commitment we have made to Christ. Not too many people debate why we have communion, so I'll just skip to open vs. closed communion because that seems to be the gray area for alot of people. The Idea of closed communion is to prevent those that aren't in Christ and a part of the body of believers from bringing trouble onto themselves by participating in communion and suffering the consequences, which it is made clear in the bible exist. This is done by the session of the church talking to whoever wants to join in the communion celebration to make certain that they are in a position to do so. If it is found that they are good to go, they are "invited" to the communion table. This is done as opposed to open communion were someone not meeting the requirements to join in communion could unknowingly bring punishment onto themselves. I'm really sorry if all this seems kind of scattered, but I'm down here at the airport with no bible and just writing what I wrote kind of off the cuff. So I reserve the right to revise this later. Let me know what y'all think.
Even with the guidelines you set up there are a lot of variations. There’s the most extreme end of open communion which, unfortunately, includes most Protestant and all Catholic churches. These churches neglect their duties of protecting the Lord’s table and let anyone partake. This is irresponsible on the part of the leaders and dangerous for undiscerning people.
Then you have the form of open communion which our church practices. Before each celebration our pastor will spend a good deal of time “fencing the table” when he explains what we’re doing, why we’re doing it and who may participate. We allow any members (in good standing) from a Bible-believing church to eat with us as a sign of recognition that the church is not limited to our narrow geographic location. However, the elders do withhold the sacrament from people if they are under discipline, and in a church our size that’s a fairly good precautionary stop on their part. And because there’s such a lengthy explanation beforehand, you would have to be a fool to “eat and drink judgment on himself.”
A step up from that is closed communion in the form ya’ll have up here. I don’t have a problem with that, and I admire the elders for taking their responsibilities seriously. Either closed in this form or open the way our church practices it is OK with me.
But then you have closed communion the way that some other churches have it. These churches will not allow you to the Lord’s table unless you are a member of their church, and sometimes, unless you have been baptized into their church. This is too extreme, because as long as they know (as well as any authorities can know) the state of a person’s soul there is no reason to keep them from the sacrament. As a matter of fact, they are abusing their power by withholding the “spiritual nourishment” (Westminster Confession, not the Bible) which believers receive from it.
So there’s by opinion. But I think you’re wrong that people only disagree about the degree of fencing the table. There are people, even within the Reformed community who disagree on the degree to which Christ is present during the sacrament (On the extremes: Luther and Zwingli), and who may serve communion and what settings are appropriate.
Posted by
Anonym |
7:37 PM
I only said that I usually skim long posts. I still read them. And I agree with both of you.
Posted by
Josh |
10:07 AM
That's true. I guess it is more "controversial" outside of just the open/closed discussion than I made it sound. The reason that I focused on the open/closed variations is because last time I discussed communion with someone, that was the main point of difference. They were a Baptist and practiced open communion. They thought that there was really no harm in just letting anyone join, although sinners wouldn't really benefit. I do think that going as far as saying "if your not a member of our church, you can't have communion" is too far, but I do think there needs to be a solemn awareness of what exactly is taking place in the way that Kara summarized above.
Discussions of beliefs aside, when you actually understand what is being celebrated in communion, it just makes it that much richer! I think alot of times people get hung up on the specifics and forget to consider the real wonder of what is taking place. We are celebrating the very roots of the hope that we have graciously been given! God loved me, a lowly sinner and terrible writer, enough that he sacrificed himself to atone for my sins. The one who is beyond perfect paid the price that I deserved to pay but would never be able to satisfy. Not only has he done this, but he continues to care for me as if for his own son. No wonder we celebrate communion! What else could be more worth a celebration? That said don't go away thinking that I am undermining the need for us to know what God has commanded that we believe. Just the opposite. The desire to worship and follow him in the way that he wants just follows when we are humbled with the understanding of his sacrifice. So it’s good to talk about these things.
Posted by
Ross |
4:39 PM