I heard from a brother that in the first Century Church if you were visiting from another church that you couldn't take communion without a letter from your church vouching that you were a disciple(haven't verified his claim yet). Communion is sacred for us because we know what it represents. Having said that do you think we should let people who don't know what communion is take communion?

well I personally believe that only baptized disciples should participate in communion, because it is a time for us to go to the cross and be reminded of our burial and resurrection with Christ ... and although I kinda don't appreciate when parents let their little kids take communion or when non-disciples take communion, i wouldn't want to be the one to tell them they're not "allowed." Maybe they are disciples but (as far as teens go) aren't allowed by their non-christian parents to get baptized. Or maybe they don't fully understand the purpose of communion but if someone were to tell them they can't participate they may develop bitter feelings and that may damage their relationship with God ... basically I don't think it's my place to dictate whether or not "non-christians" are allowed to do certain things. But ultimately I still believe communion is for baptized disciples (oh and should be taken weekly btw).

oh and um, no you DO NOT need a letter to take communion. You know if you're a disciple and God knows. that's all that matters. No one needs to prove to people who run a church that they are "eligible" to take communion, or whatever :)

i agree with MoLeCrAp. I also suggest to take communion outside the sunday service, maybe sunday evenings and only with disciples, maybe even in small groups. Take more time for communion then usual 10-15 minutes at service. Don't rush it :) Make it awesome

ArmondOC,

What you have said sounds consistant with things I have read.

I do not think that we should, generally, let people who don't know what communion is take communion.  I say generally because perhaps there could be some unlikely circumstance that might warrant it, like providing a meal to some starving person.

MoLeCrAp,

Previously I didn't have an issue with the kids taking communion, because I don't believe, and still don't believe, that the early church would have forbade it.  However,

1 Corinthians 11:28-30 (NIV)
²⁸ A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
²⁹ For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.
³⁰ That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.

Because kids don't recognize the body of the Lord, it seems safest (many died in Corinth) that they shouldn't partake of it, though I still doubt that this was the practice of the early church.  I just can't see them (or Christ) denying their children a meal.

However, all this this is something for a teacher to address. Not I.

The earlies church actually had a meal for communion.  The Lords Feast was more then a small piece of cracker and a few drops of juice.  The letter of recomendation has to do with verses like:

2 John 1:10-11 (NCV)
¹⁰ If someone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not welcome or accept that person into your house.
¹¹ If you welcome such a person, you share in the evil work.

The early evangelists(?) took the command to take nothing with you on your journies quite literally, if I remember what I've read correctly.  They were quite dependant on the hospitality of others.  A false teacher would welcome a free meal, but they were encouraged not to aid them, lest they share in their evil work.  So apparently they would carry with them letters of recommendations (some of the epistles may function as such a letter) so they know who is who.

Marks,

I appreciate your concern and respect for communion, but I feel it's too central to a worship service to be taken out.

It's a time when Christ tells us how much he loves us.

Grace and Peace,

Glen

Communion: It is my understanding (and I am totally open to being wrong) that the early church - for the 1st couple of centuries - before Augustine - practiced communion every week - on the first day of the week - otherwise known as the Lord's Day - and only those who had been baptized into his death participated.

I think I remember someone writing something about the heretics and that they (the heretics) were worse off for taking communion than if they didn't.

My personal convictions are such that when I stopped going to church in 2003, even though I would occasionally visit our church and other churches as well, I didn't take communion at our church or any of the other churches either - because I knew my heart wasn't right. I'd be taking it in an unworthy manner.

I remember listening to a communion message once and visualizing Jesus at the table w/ his disciples and there being an empty chair for me. I longed for the day when I could sit at the table w/ Jesus again. 4 years went by before I finally got my heart right. Finally earlier this year (2008) I was finally able to dine w/ my bros/sis. It was a very special day to me.

In 1995 When I missed church my best friend and (discipler at that time) came to my house w/ another brother or two and brought me crackers and juice. We went outside and sat together and prayed and I 'took communion'. Just cause I missed church didn't mean that I had to miss out on this special time for the church.

If all communion is - is a cracker and some juice - then anyone can take it. But if it has any connection to the cross - then only those who have been connected to the cross (Rom 6:2-7) should take it.

Now this can open a big o bag of worms, because unlike the early church, EVERYBODY is a CHRISTIAN today. at least in their own minds. I brought a friend to church and didn't say anything to him about not taking communion the first two times he came w/ me. But finally I did lean over quietly and tell him "don't take it, we'll talk about it later". He was totally ok w/ what I said. Maybe it was a trust / respect issue? But I had prayed about it and I think God really worked there.

Well there are my two cents worth which may be overpriced.

Hi All! Hi Armond!

After reading I Corinthians 11:17-34 about communion i found some differencies with our today communion. Not the purposes but more to the portion, the bread, the cup, and the effect.

First, some of them eat Lord's bread and drink from His cup just like having meals, lunch or dinner. It shows that the portion was bigger than today communion. Also the bread and the cup was bigger.

Second, those who were not recognize the meaning of the Lord's body, got sick, weak and even died. But today, i never saw people sick, weak and died when/ after taking communion eventhough they are not a Christian.Why? Because the portion of bread and cup is very little compared to the communion in the past was very large.

I didn't mean to break the law or rule here, but i see that today Christian have better moral, attitude and perspective toward communion than some Christians in Corinthians in the past.

My opinion, there will be no problem for non-Christians today to take communion. But the question is what for and what is the purpose? Not only about communion but also in all aspects of our life, we normally asking the purpose about what we do.