Today we have the honor of bringing you a guest post by our good friend Dr. Malcolm Yarnell, Associate Professor of Systematic Theology, Director of the Oxford Study Program, Director of the Center for Theological Research, and Editor of the Southwestern Journal of Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
In this post, Dr. Yarnell addresses the depth of the biblical witness regarding the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper for churches.
Recently, a friend passed me the link to a video promotion for a DVD entitled “Communion.” It is an interesting video (and painfully slow, so be warned!) It is interesting in that the author(s) seems to present the Lord’s Supper as indiscriminately intended for all sinners. But this is too simple of a solution, and does violence to the biblical witness.
It is an indisputable truth that all human beings, other than Jesus Christ, are tainted by sin. This is what makes us worthy of the eternal punishment of death. Death, of course, is separation from God. And the Son of God took on our humanity in order to suffer the penalty of death for us on the cross and rise from the dead so that we might have eternal life. Christ came to save sinners from sin and its consequence of death, which ends in eternal punishment away from the comforting presence of God. One is saved through being born again, which accompanies faith in Him and repentance toward God (John 3).
Unfortunately, the video’s author, in this short promotion, presents the Lord’s Supper as being intended for all sinners indiscriminately. But is this the case? Is communion intended for all sinners? Absolutely not!
When the Corinthian church demonstrated a penchant for gross immersion in the sins of the wider culture of their day, Paul rebuked them in no uncertain terms. The point he repeatedly made in the Corinthian correspondence was that the Lord’s Supper was to be reserved only for the regenerate church. Those who were still infatuated with the sinful culture of Corinthian paganism were reminded that communion with God and communion with the devil are incompatible (1 Cor 10:20-21). The Corinthians were warned that they must be separate from the world: “‘Come out from their midst and be separate,’ says the Lord, ‘and do not touch what is unclean; and I will welcome you’” (2 Cor 6:17).
In other words, I believe that, according to Scripture, the ordinance of communion, practiced by the churches at the direct command of Jesus Christ, is to be reserved for sinners who have been born again and are pursuing a life of repentance. Are the unholy invited into communion with the Holy One? Yes, indeed. But, first, there must be a transformation prior to communion. Sinners must repent and believe; otherwise, they are still sinners subject to the judgment of God. Moreover, such repentance from sin and faith in Christ must continue to characterize the Christian’s life.
Paul warned that those who continued in sin are subject to divine judgment precisely because they were unrepentant sinners. “For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly” (1 Cor 11:29). The body must be judged. “The body,” of course, is a common Pauline metaphor for the church. Individual Christians, in other words, must examine their own consciences (1 Cor 11:28), and Christians in the local church must hold one another accountable for one another’s doctrine and conduct (1 Cor 11:29).
A concrete example in Corinth occurred with a young man involved in gross sexual sin. The speech of the Corinthian church had become so saturated with vice that she overlooked a situation by which even the pagans would be shocked (1 Cor 5:1). But rather than pass over the matter in silence, or make excuses for it, Paul called the church to take immediate action. As an Apostle, Paul recognized the need for the congregation itself to exercise governance through the application of discipline. The church must repent of its habit of condoning gross sin and excommunicate the sinner. When the church gathered, it must remove the sinful person “in the power of the Lord Jesus” and return him to the realm of Satan, i.e., the world (1 Cor 5:2-5).
The action of the Corinthian church in disciplining the unrepentant sinner was necessary, in spite of the difficulty it might bring to all involved. Yet, the difficulties were worth what seems to have been the result. Rather than continue condoning sexual sin, the majority of the Corinthian church seems to have obeyed and applied church discipline. This resulted in getting the sinner’s attention, bringing to him great sorrow, and as a result, he repented. Paul then called the church to restore the repentant sinner to fellowship (2 Cor 2:1-9). Through discipline, an unrepentant sinner who thought he was already a Christian but did not act like it, was brought to repentance and faithfulness towards Christ.
My friends, our churches must seek to maintain their public purity. On the one hand, the church will never be perfect until all Christians gather (for the first time as one) at the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7-8). On the other hand, the members of the church are commanded by Christ to help one another towards repentance and a faithful lifestyle even now. If an individual Christian will not repent of publicly-known sin, then he or she must be excluded by the church (and only by the church–there is no room for elders arrogating to themselves the power of church discipline) for the purpose of loving redemption (Matt 18:15-17).
Let it be clearly noted that the intended outcome is, ultimately, the redemption of the sinner. Punishment is entirely in the purview of God alone, but loving discipline is given by the Lord to the church to practice when necessary. The church is to separate from unrepentant sinners in order that they might prompt one another through the covenantal life of the community to follow Christ completely.
So, we come back to the question prompted by the subject video: Is communion for sinners? Yes, but not without discrimination. Communion is only for sinners who have been born again. We know we are truly born again only because we are repenting of sin and are seeking to live lives faithful to the high call of Jesus Christ in discipleship.
Perhaps the video that prompted this short essay goes further into these matters. Unfortunately, the website does not clarify. I hope the full content is better than the presentation available publicly, for what they have posted online presents a highly distorted picture of the scriptural witness. For more on the biblical understanding of the regenerate church practicing close communion, see the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 articles on the church (art. 6) and on baptism and the Lord’s Supper (art. 7).
Jesus is the Lord of His churches, which means that He is to be followed in what He commands them.
Based on the passage you quoted from 1 Corinthians 11, taking communion is, or should be, a sobering experience even for “sinners who have been born again.”
“For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?” (1 Peter 4:17)
Malcolm,
I agree with you that participation in the Lord’s Supper should be limited to “repentant sinners,” and not all sinners indiscriminately. I really like the wording you have chosen: “sinners who have been born again and are pursuing a life of repentance.” As I understand this, it implies that none of us, on this side of heaven, ever achieve a full and perfect repentance. There are always dark corners inside of our heart for which the Holy Spirit is continually guiding us toward a fuller and deeper repentance.
One of the big issues for us as Baptists (as you are well aware) is: Do we understand authentic water baptism to be a sine qua non sign of truly “pursuing a life of repentance”? As I understand it, it is possible to have a faulty understanding of baptism, and, as a result of this faulty understanding, not have actually followed through correctly with the act of baptism, yet, at the same time, be genuinely “pursuing a life of repentance.”
Now, I agree that the norm for one who is truly “pursuing a life of repentance” would be that he/she eventually come to recognize what the Bible teaches about baptism, and act accordingly. However, I think we can never demand full and perfect repentance as a requirement for admission to the Lord’s Table. If such were the case, none of us would ever qualify this side of heaven.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Is Communion for Sinners? :: SBC Today -- Topsy.com
It’s amazing to me that this post is necessary for today’s church. What are we coming to? Why don’t our church leaders (pastors, deacons) know these things?
The gold standard:
“….I believe that, according to Scripture, the ordinance of communion, practiced by the churches at the direct command of Jesus Christ, is to be reserved for sinners who have been born again and are pursuing a life of repentance.”
Thank you Malcolm.
Haven’t seen you around lately. I kinda figured you were off fightin’ the Devil in Siberia or something. :-)
cb
David:
I don’t think “repentance” and “baptism” should be conflated. Just because a person has been “obidient” in being Baptized does not necessarily mean that he has put has put away sinful habits.
I don’t think water Baptism (or any other Baptism) is the “sin qua non” of repentance. However, baptism may be a subset of those things which make up repentance.
Dr. Yarnell,
Thank you for this excellent post regarding Communion and discipline and the local church.
I wonder if the editors/writers of the Threads material at LifeWay can shed further light on the troublesome video which sparked this post?
By Grace Alone!
David,
Perhaps you can explain to me how a church that promotes the pursuit of repentance can simultaneously minimize obedience to Christ’s first command of obedience for the born-again Christian. Then I might be able to answer your question.
CB,
The Devil is active beyond Siberia, too.
Scott,
Threads is a LifeWay product?! Oh, well, nothing should surprise us anymore.
Brother Malcolm,
No doubt, Our Lord prepared His Table for sinners so that they will understand their participation in the one body, consuming of the one bread.
1 Corinthian 10:16-18 “Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? (17) Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread. (18) Look at the nation Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices sharers in the altar?”
1 Corinthian 10:21-24 “You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. (22) Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? We are not stronger than He, are we? (23) All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify. (24) Let no one seek his own good, but that of his neighbor.”
I especially like the way you put this….
On the one hand, the church will never be perfect until all Christians gather (for the first time as one) at the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7-8). On the other hand, the members of the church are commanded by Christ to help one another towards repentance and a faithful lifestyle even now. If an individual Christian will not repent of publicly-known sin, then he or she must be excluded by the church (and only by the church–there is no room for elders arrogating to themselves the power of church discipline) for the purpose of loving redemption (Matt 18:15-17).
You are absolutely right that elders (whether a church has limited themselves to one, or whether there are many to edify the church) are not given authority to discipline apart from the church as a body, but only work in the manner outlined by the Apostles to bring about restoration in the body.
Even though the Corinthian letter is a picture of the path some in the church were taking to a defeasance of the Lord’s Supper, and Paul’s corrective instruction, the greater and more instructive picture for the Lord’s Table is found in the gospel letters given by the Lord, where he does convey the gravity of remembering this cup poured out for them, the new covenant……
Luke 22:15-22 “And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; (16) for I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” (17) And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; (18) for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.” (19) And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” (20) And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood. (21) “But behold, the hand of the one betraying Me is with Mine on the table. (22) “For indeed, the Son of Man is going as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed!”
….while the sin of one called into group was not yet visible…. the warning to all who would betray the Son is clear to all the church.
Thank you for the post,
Blessings,
Chris
Malcolm,
:-)
Scott,
Is Threads one of our products?
cb
Malcolm,
As I see it, it is not a question of minimizing obedience to Christ’s command, but rather maximizing the importance of opening up communion to all those who are truly “pursuing a life of repentance” by way of the grace offered through the shed blood of Jesus.
If you could sit in on some of the discipleship sessions I have taught, or sermons I have preached on baptism, I think you would agree that I emphasize the importance of obedience to Christ’s command (believer’s baptism by immersion) as much as any closed or close communionist.
I just don’t see why these two equally biblical doctrines necessarily need to be pitted against each other.
CB & Malcolm,
The first link in the post, to the video preview on ‘Communion,’ contains a label in the bottom right hand corner of the page: “Threads by LifeWay.” Clicking on it leads you to the home page of the Threads line of products: “Threads produces quality Bible studies for young adults and college students. Visit our studies page to see everything we have to offer.”
I am still interested if those from LifeWay in charge of Threads have any comment.
Sola Gratia!
Well, Scott,
You really don’t know how much I had hoped you to be wrong.
Scott,
Interesting… the road does lead back to Lifeway Christian Resources. Wow!
-chris
Chris,
Maybe not “Wow!” Maybe it should rather be “Sackcloth and Ashes.”
CB & Chris,
I was stopped in my tracks when I scrolled down to that part of the page. It seems our Young Adult/Collegiate publishing section of LifeWay is an open portal to a few post-modern, emergent accommodations to the golden calf of relevance.
Sola Gratia.
I think Dr. Yarnell’s point regarding “Communion for Sinners” stands regardless of one’s view on “open”, “close”, or “closed” communion.
I think there may be two subjects going on here:
(a) How does unrepentent sin bear upon receiving communion? [Dr. Yarnell's point]
(b) Which practice of communion — “close”, “closed”, or “open” — is the one that is most Biblical? [An side point brought up in the comments]
Guys,
Have you actually watched the video yet? About 90% of it is direct quotes from Scripture. And, despite Malcolm’s claim that it seems to teach that the Lord’s Supper should be open indiscriminately to all sinners, I don’t see anywhere in it where it teaches any such thing.
Now, I don’t know what the actual course teaches. But, if you are just going by the promo video that is linked, I think you may be jumping to a few unnecessary conclusions.
Some of you may well disagree with my particular view on “modified open communion,” but I don’t see where this video even necessarily agrees with me on this.
Roger,
In the past couple of years, a lot has been made in the blogosphere about paedobaptists supposedly being “unrepentant sinners.” As I read Malcolm’s post, I think the “close,” “closed,” or “open” question is clearly in the backdrop.
Brother David,
I am currently “wowed” by the type of stuff on the site, and the obscureness of the link. I’ve not watched the video completely, so I will have to reserve my opinion on that for later.
Since I’m in Nashville, I may call some of my friends over at the complex and see what strategy is being launched….
Blessings,
Chris
OK David,
Of those whom I know here to have advanced educational and theological degrees and have their days consumed with the advancement of the Kingdom and growing New Testament churches, the vote is three to one in favor of what Malcolm has stated as being the reality. You, alone seem to advance another position.
David, could it be that you are superimposing the “backdrop” idea to a degree not intended by the author (Malcolm) of the post with the intent of taking this post and comment thread to the advancement of a personal agenda?
David,
Just asking?
Hey Scott,
I am probably more wowed by this…
Dr. Malcolm Yarnell, Associate Professor of Systematic Theology, Director of the Oxford Study Program, Director of the Center for Theological Research, and Editor of the Southwestern Journal of Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Brother Yarnell is a busy man!
Blessings,
Chris
CB,
I confess. I find myself in a minority position among the commenters on SBC Today.
As to the point Malcolm was making, could the following sentence taken from the final part of his post possibly be a clue?
“For more on the biblical understanding of the regenerate church practicing close communion, see the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 articles on the church (art. 6) and on baptism and the Lord’s Supper (art. 7).”
CB,
As David has said….I don’t think there is any doubt that Dr. Yarnell hoisting this up against the document mentioned at the end of the post. Wouldn’t you say.
-Chris
Roger is correct that there are probably two dimensions to this conversation (if not more). One might perhaps hold to open communion while practicing church discipline; however, it would take a different line than our common confession and it would, it seems to me, be more difficult to maintain.
David,
That is why I asked my question of you constructed thusly:
“….superimposing the “backdrop” idea to a degree not intended by the author….?
Notice the words “to a degree not intended….”
Chris,
See comment #27
Dr. Yarnell,
David’s right, it is a list of Bible verses and graphics. Very dangerous stuff, quoting the Bible. ;-)
And, note right under the video it says:
“‘Do this in remembrance of me.’ That’s what Jesus said as He instituted the act of Communion, a lasting ordinance for all Christ-followers.”
It is a “lasting ordinance for all Christ-followers.” That seems pretty clear to me. Where does it say they welcome “sinners indiscriminately” and it is intended for “all sinners.” Seems to be that it is for Christ followers.
Also, I was under the impression that agency employees were not going after other agency employees. Just out of interest: did you know this was related to LifeWay when you posted this?
And, your comment, “Threads is a LifeWay product?! Oh, well, nothing should surprise us anymore,” seems a little surprising from a professor at SWBTS. Or, maybe it does not.
David,
I seem to end up in the minority on any blog. So don’t feel the only one clothed at a nudist colony.
Micah,
Aren’t you supposed to listening to some conference speakers? Tell Marty and Art I said hello. :-)
CB,
RE: #27.
Sorry. I’ll try to walk a little more gingerly on the egg-shells next time. ;)
Micah,
The emphasis in the video is on the openness of the Lord’s Supper, not its restriction to the church. It is laughable to try to bend it the other way as an apologetic.
As to your question, no, I did not realize it was LifeWay until I read the small print at the very bottom after Scott pointed it. But that really does not matter anyways. Any theological statement made by anyone is subject to criticism. We are Baptists not Catholics. If LifeWay sells bad product, and the jury is still out on this one, they are subject to critique.
In Christ,
Malcolm
David and Micah,
Quoting the Bible is a good thing. Quoting it out of context, not so good. Arians used the Bible much but they were still heretics by any definition. Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons also appeal to the Bible, but this does not mean they have gotten it correctly.
Now, back to the point of this post. I imagine the Corinthian sinner called himself a “Christ-follower” or something like that, but Paul still called for his discipline. Shall the Lord’s Supper be restricted to repentant sinners or all sinners?
In Christ,
Malcolm
Malcolm,
As I see it, the emphasis on the video is on the amazing fact that the only One who is not a sinner–Jesus–invites all of us who are sinners (independent of the important point about being repentant or unrepentant) to share the Table together with Him.
From my perspective, that is a more important theological point than “its restriction to the church,” and thus, not worthy of being criticized ipso facto.
As you correctly observe, both in your post and your comments here, any other judgment regarding the product being advertised is premature, until it is actually read or seen.
David,
Indeed, that is the positive point of the video. The sinless One calls all sinners to communion. But the point that was not even touched is an absolutely essential one: repentance. That is necessary for communion to happen, for God is holy and does not allow sin in His presence. I can preach Jesus as love, but if I never issue a call to be born again, to repent, to believe in Him, am I really preaching the gospel?
In Christ,
Malcolm
Well, gentlemen (and ladies, if any are reading), this has been fun, but at the end of the day, after all of those other responsibilities and this little diversion, I have a family to minister to and must depart. I will leave it to you to decide whether repentance is necessary for the church’s communion, which must seek to reflect, if it is to have integrity, our actual communion with God.
Malcolm,
If the actual resource being advertised proposes to teach systematically about the Lord’s Supper, without mentioning repentance, I am in total agreement with you.
But, don’t you think that is a bit tough of a standard (touching all major theological issues involved) for a promo video of this nature?
David,
Quick response. The point for me was not the video–that was merely illustrative–but the issue of repentant sinners coming to the table of the Lord. Whether the LifeWay material requires review is up to somebody else. I prefer to leave it at that.
Au revoir,
Malcolm
And, having read your comment #37, lest anyone out there might happen to think that I do not agree that “repentance is necessary for the church’s communion, which must seek to reflect, if it is to have integrity, our actual communion with God,” I most certainly do.
As a matter of fact, I don’t know of anyone in Southern Baptist life currently who would not agree with that statement, as you have worded it here.
Heart of the issue:
“Shall the Lord’s Supper be restricted to repentant sinners or all sinners?”
Heart of my response:
“The Lord’s Supper should be restricted to those who are ‘pursuing a life of repentance.’ However, none of us, on this side of Heaven, reaches a place of perfect repentance.”
Though I believe I would find myself in close agreement with Dr. Yarnell on the question of the Lord’s Supper, I’m not sure I agree with him on the intent of the video. My take is that the video was emphasizing the wonder of grace that such sinners would be invited to commune with Christ. I don’t think the point was to establish “open communion” or to suggest that unrepentant sinners should be welcomed to the Lord’s Table.
If we assume that the disciples (with the exception of Judas) were repentant sinners who in spite of their sin (self-promotion, betrayal, etc) were welcomed by Jesus and saved by His sacrificial death, perhaps the point was to emphasize the amazing grace of Christ in saving just such sinners and welcoming them into fellowship with Himself.
These kinds of presentations are subjective by nature and liable to being “spun” in one direction or another. That’s why I am so thankful for objective words given by God to clearly reveal Himself and His purposes. I wouldn’t use this kind of video without providing some Word-centered explanation to guard against erroneous understandings of the Supper. With that said, I didn’t sense any intention to diminish the importance of communion. Rather, it seemed to me to emphasize the wonder of grace.
Regards to All,
Kelly Randolph
David,
Who said we were talking about the idea of sinless perfection here? “Pursuing a life of repentance” implies that one understands there is no perfect repentance this side of heaven.
David, if you were a Black and Tan Coon Hound, I would give $50.000 for you and enter you in every Grand Night Champion Coon Hunt in America. We would become billionaires in just a few years, because you never would give up the hunt. :-)
See you later. Got to take little girls to Karate practice.
cb
Brothers,
I have watched the promo but have not seen the entire video. I will say that from the promo it advocates for us to go and get all in the street to come and dine at the Father’s table. While we all understand that to mean repentance in order to get to the Father’s table, the video promo does not say any such thing. Thus, if you are going to promote something like this in a bible study it would appear that we should at least cover a sound theological practice. As I recall Lifeway, while desiring to appeal to a uninformed theological culture, is not headed up by uninformed theological personnel. Thus, it appears the criticism, while not being vitriol, is needed.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim,
See comment #38.
Brother David,
If this were a cultural based bookstore promotion, I could possibly overlook their lack of covering the theological perspective. However, for a theologically sound entity to use this as a promotion clearly should be criticized. Notice that the Scripture they used was taken so far out of context it isn’t even funny. The Scripture they used, Luke 14:15-24, concerns those that desire worldly acceptance over our Lord’s invitation. Thus, theologically sound people made a decision to promote something pulled completely out of context and thus promotes a theological flawed concept.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim,
OK. I drop it. This is a silly thing to be arguing over, anyway.
I’ve been engaged in these battles for three years now (although less and less these days). I’d like to make a procedural observation rather than one on the particular topic in question (although I certainly have opinions about the topic).
1. There is the standard of the courtroom, which we rightly embrace when people seem to be on trial. Can you prove that this is what they meant? Are they “guilty” beyond reasonable doubt?
2. Then there is the business of theology, which is very often—much more often than we might like to admit—a matter of nuance. Theological movements often turn as much on what is overlooked or minimized as they turn on what a theologian explicitly says. For example, Rauschenbusch never really denied the gospel, I don’t think; he just was so captivated with other things that he didn’t have much to say about individual salvation. The movement that he fathered, following his lead, completely lost the real gospel in the quest for the social gospel.
Thus, it is not inappropriate for one of our most qualified theologians to take note of the theological tone set by omissions. Nuance is important in theology. If Malcolm were calling for somebody to be fired or something, then we’d need something more than nuance. But he didn’t even know that it was a Lifeway product. He’s watching theology and evaluating it and offering a critique. That’s what he does. That’s what Southern Baptists pay him to do. That’s what he’s great at doing.
I can’t offer any personal opinion about the video, for the site seems to be down.
Bart,
Thank you!
interesting.
DAvid
Malcolm Yarnell: “If LifeWay sells a bad product, and the jury is still out on this one, they are subject to critique.”
Didn’t Jimmy Draper go to Paige Patterson with a complaint after LifeWay recieved similar criticism by Ben Cole?