# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2001_S370
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

370 THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

This statement is a correct one, as far as it goes. But the historic
practice of the Christian church, and of the Synod, has not lumped all
who are denied admission to the Lord’s Supper into the single category
of “those who receive unworthily.” Some should not come to the Sup-
per because as unworthy communicants they would receive God’s judg-
ment. Some should not come because as “confessors” of heterodox doc-
trine their presence would be unseemly or untitting, because it violates
confessional unity.

3. OUR LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS, IN THE WORDS OF
THE SMALL CATECHISM, STATE CLEARLY THAT ONE IS
TRULY WORTHY AND WELL PREPARED WHO HAS FAITH
IN THESE WORDS OF CHRIST: “GIVEN AND SHED FOR
YOU FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS” (SC, VI, 10).

This statement is a fine one, as far as it goes. The Small Catechism,
however, is written out of pastoral concern for members of Lutheran
congregations, and does not address the issue of the presence of two
different confessions at the same altar.

4. OUR LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS, IN THE WORDS OF
THE LARGE CATECHISM, STATE CLEARLY THAT ONLY
THOSE SHOULD EXCLUDE THEMSELVES FROM THE
SACRAMENT WHO DESIRE NO GRACE AND ABSOLUTION
AND HAVE NO INTENTION TO AMEND THEIR LIVES (LC,
V, 5,61).

DEUP speaks of Christians “excluding themselves” and does not
use the confessional language of pastors “inviting some and forbidding
others.” Moreover, Paul the pastor did not leave the Corinthians to their
own devices. He instructed them how to examine themselves and he in-
sisted that their divisions cease.

5. A PRACTICE CONGRUENT WITH THE SCRIPTURE
AND THE CONFESSIONS CALLS FOR THE SACRAMENT
TO BE SHARED WITH THOSE WHO REPENT OF THEIR
SINS, BELIEVE THE real presence, AND SINCERELY INTEND
TO AMEND THEIR LIVES.

DEUP does not take into consideration viewing Christians as “con-
fessors.” which the discussion above has shown to be necessary.

6. SCRIPTURE IMPOSES NO DENOMINATIONAL RE-
QUIREMENT ON BAPTIZED CHRISTIANS WHO DESIRE TO
RECEIVE THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST OFFERED IN
THE LORD’S SUPPER.

In ! Corinthians 10 and 11 Paul does not speak to the same denom-
inational situations as exist today because he is addressing an intra-con-
gregational situation. As indicated above, however, the Scriptures do
address doctrinal divisions very much like those that mark the contem-
porary scene. While “denominational membership” cannot become an
automatic litmus test for admission to the Sacrament, nevertheless the
Lord’s Supper presumes and requires a unity (Acts 2:42) that is contra-
dicted when, under ordinary circumstances, opposing confessions are
represented among those who commune together. The Eucharist is a
mutual proclamation of the Lord’s death, and differing confessions at
the same altar cannot be the norm or regular practice of our congrega-
tions.

THEREFORE WE AFFIRM THE RIGHT OF LUTHERAN
CONGREGATIONS AND PASTORS TO OFFER THE EU-
CHARIST TO ALL WHO SHARE THIS BIBLICAL AND CON-
FESSIONAL STANCE. WE DECLARE THIS TO BE OUR EU-
CHARISTIC UNDERSTANDING AND PRACTICE AND
COMMEND IT TO OTHERS.

DEUP does not adequately reflect biblical teaching and confessional
emphases. Its major deficiency is the failure to address the corporate
character and implications of the Eucharist itself.

TV. CONCLUDING SUMMARY

The Lord’s Supper offers the two-fold gift of forgiveness and
peace with God on the one hand, and unity and oneness among
those who commune together on the other hand (Matt. 26:28;
! Cor. 10:16-17). Those who receive the body and the blood of the
Lord do so, therefore, in terms of their relationship with God as
well as with their fellow-communicants.*

2001 Convention Workbook

The most important distinction among those who commune is
the difference between communing “worthily/tn a worthy manner”
and receiving the Eucharist “unworthily/in an unworthy manner.”
All those who repent of their sins, trust tn Christ, believe tn the real
presence of Christ’s body and blood and seek to be one with those
with whom they commune are prepared to commune “in a worthy
manner.” The positive purpose of this distinction ts that those who
come might receive the Eucharist as Christ intends it to be received,
for the forgiveness of sins and the continued unity of the body of
Christ. The negative purpose of this distinction is to prevent some
from receiving the Sacrament to their own spiritual harm.

To be sure, Christians themselves ought to seek to discern when
they should or should not come to the Lord’s Supper. Those living
an unrepentantly immoral life may realize that receiving the Lord’s
Supper could harm them. Christians who reject the doctrine of the
real presence may also understand that they should not come to an
altar where faith in the real presence is proclaimed and required.
But along with individual Christians, pastors also have received re-
sponsibility to instruct, exhort. and include or exclude some from
the Lord’s Supper. The very existence of the letter of | Corinthians
itself gives evidence of Paul exercising his responsibility as a stew-
ard of the divine mysteries (1 Cor. 4:1). The Lutheran Confessions
also assume and describe this pastoral responsibility. When our
pastors ask some to refrain from communing because they may do
so “in an unworthy manner,” it will be done out of love and con-
cern for the spiritual well-being of those persons.

Moreover, the second distinction among communicants also
flows out of concern for their well-being, for heterodox teaching is
a danger to one’s life in Christ. This second distinction views indi-
vidual Christians as persons who represent the confession or doc-
trine of the church body to which they have promised their loyalty.
The LCMS, therefore. also teaches in accordance with the Scrip-
tures, the Confessions, and the historic tradition of the church when
it asks that fellow-Christians who are confessors of a different doc-
trine not participate in the Lord’s Supper at our altars. The Lutheran
Confessions are especially clear that those who adhere to the Augs-
burg Confession should not practice altar fellowship with those
who hold to unscriptural confessions, and so the LCMS has pre-
served this historic practice. We do this not with any thought of su-
periority or with any gladness, but in deep sorrow and prayer to the
Lord of the Church that he would remove the divisions that sepa-
rate His children from one another in their visible expressions of
fellowship. Even as we view Christians of other confessions in this
way, however, we must al al] times acknowledge the possibility,
even necessity, of situations of crisis or personal spiritual need in
which these fellow Christians as individual believers in need of the
Sacrament’s comfort and strength might receive such also from our
pastors and at our altars.*¢

A final note. If we are right about the seriousness of the divi-
sions that separate the visible churches from one another, we are
not permitted by Christ or His Gospel to hold back and wait for
those whom we believe to be in error to come to us. We must go to
them, committed to genuine, respectful participation in substantial
theological dialogue, urgently praying to the Lord of the Church
“that the ime of complete unity among all who believe in him may
return.’

V. APPENDIX: COMMON QUESTIONS
ABOUT ADMISSION TO THE LORD’S SUPPER

1. Question: How can we possibly say that all those Christians
from other church bodies are unworthy to receive the Lord’s Sup-
per? Isn’t that what we are saying?

Answer: Absolutely not! There are two reasons why people can
be refused admission to the Lord’s Supper. The first has to do with
faith and discerning the body. Those who do not have such faith
and discernment would commune in an unworthy manner and