Litmus tests for various Christian groups

[ken_sylvania]

Would you be expected to get permission to commune elsewhere or is that up to the individual?

I don't know if there would be any consequences if a person did this on their own but I think failure to consult ahead of time would be disrespectful toward the congregation where I am a member. I imagine others would feel the same so I think it's fair to say I would be expected to consult ahead of time (the interaction would be somewhat different from simply "asking permission" although effectively would be about the same thing.

So something like, "What thoughts do you have about me communing with X group while I am in ___?"

Correct. I myself would not be inclined to say "I would like to commune as a visitor at congregation X while I am in ____. Would you be OK with that?" Rather I would phrase the interaction more like you did above. That is why I say it's not exactly asking permission and yet effectively is.

That being said, with travel being what it is and there being not a lot of appetite for our members to distance themselves from our congregations unnecessarily those type of situations aren't likely to happen often outside of churches with whom we would share a high degree of similarity in doctrine and practice (including the practice of the brethren wearing the regulation cut coat for certain occasions).

[ken_sylvania]

I'm still interested in an answer to the question below that I asked earlier.

Here again, from my perspective, I wonder if this isn't a distinction without a difference. Where is the biblical data supporting such a framework dichotomy, where one would be in Christian fellowship and not "technically" in communion or breaking of bread. That is the model that I am trying to gracefully challenge...while at the same time, pointing out that "withholding" fellowship, which is in fact a "litmus" test, at least of sorts.

That's a fair question. To help flesh that out just a bit more, do you see biblical data supporting any kind of "tiered" fellowship where there are differing degrees of closeness of fellowship within the spectrum of those who follow Christ?

That is a good question. I am reflecting on it. I think my answer is I do support tiered fellowship though I cant think immediately of Biblical data. I am not sure though about the communion being the bar/tier.

I dont really have an answer that I find totally satisfying, long story short.

Do you see any kind of Biblical directive or practice that leads you to believe that the sharing of the bread and the cup should begin at the very outermost fringes of those who profess to serve Christ? Or is it maybe one or two rings in from the very outside?

I'll share my view in a separate post.

[ken_sylvania]

My experience, in virtually every kind of human relationship, is that close relationships require effort, require time, require understanding, require communication, require trust. Relationships with other Christians are the same. If I've only just met someone, it takes time and communication to begin to understand that person and build a relationship with him. I find it impossible to bring someone I've just met into that close inner circle of trust and mutual understanding. Now, that doesn't mean we can't fellowship together. It doesn't mean we can't encourage one another in following Christ. But we really don't know each other much at all at that point.

Communion, as I believe Jesus intends for it to be practiced, is to be among a group of people who do share a close bond - a group of people committed to washing one another's feet in their spiritual lives, a group of people committed to sharing in Christ's sacrificial blood. It is simply a fact of human existence that I cannot share a close mutual fellowship with twenty thousand people. But I can choose to take time for the brethren in my local congregation, to be there for them, to take the time that it takes to build a close bond with them. Communion is not just a commemoration of Jesus' broken body and shed blood, but also a reminder of how we are in this together.

While the Scriptures don't tell us how communion must be done, I would suggest that the pattern Jesus gave us lends itself more toward "close" communion than toward the idea that sharing the bread and wine should be freely with any person who names the name of Christ.

We know that as Jesus' earthly ministry drew toward its close he had many followers - many who believed in him. Perhaps still a small group in comparison to the crowds gathering in Jerusalem, but certainly more than twelve. And yet, Jesus had a close circle of disciples who were much closer to Him than the rest of His followers. And among those twelve, a smaller group who seem to have been even closer.

When it came time to initiate the first communion, Jesus didn't choose a location where a large group of his disciples could gather. The participants invited to this communion were not random. They were his close friends, those who had demonstrated their dedication to following him. Although Jesus in his perfect knowledge knew that Judas Iscariot was a traitor, yet Judas Iscariot was up to that point demonstrating perfect fidelity as far as human eye could know, and so Judas was included. I would hope that none of us would believe that because Jesus did not invite His remaining followers to this communion service He was therefore judging them as not being His followers.

I'm not sure there is a better way than to follow the pattern Jesus demonstrated.

[Ernie]

I think you should wash your face. Just good basic hygene.

I agree.

Anointing one's head when fasting is not unheard of among conservative Mennonites, although I could say if the percentage of men who do so is closer to 10% or 50% of those who fast.

I assume you meant to say "couldn't".

So what do they anoint with if not with oil?

Yes, I meant couldn't.

They even have the option to do it with oil if they want to. For instance:

Some people also use Pepsi and Doritos for communion.

[JohnH]

Would those of you who want broad communion be comfortable communing with someone who doesn't think we should wash each other's feet?

[Southerner]

Would those of you who want broad communion be comfortable communing with someone who doesn't think we should wash each other's feet?

The Swiss Brethren and early Hutterites didn't do it. Is it something you feel is important to practice?

[JohnH]

Would those of you who want broad communion be comfortable communing with someone who doesn't think we should wash each other's feet?

The Swiss Brethren and early Hutterites didn't do it. Is it something you feel is important to practice?

Our Lord told us, "If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet." Early Anabaptists may have missed some things, but that doesn't mean we can't follow scriptural teachings.

Given that our Lord did it right after instituting the Lord's Supper, it seems very appropriate to wash each other's feet after partaking of communion. I consider this as integral a part of the practice as requiring someone to be baptised before they may commune (which is far less clear of a teaching from scripture).

[joshuabgood]

My experience, in virtually every kind of human relationship, is that close relationships require effort, require time, require understanding, require communication, require trust. Relationships with other Christians are the same. If I've only just met someone, it takes time and communication to begin to understand that person and build a relationship with him. I find it impossible to bring someone I've just met into that close inner circle of trust and mutual understanding. Now, that doesn't mean we can't fellowship together. It doesn't mean we can't encourage one another in following Christ. But we really don't know each other much at all at that point.

Communion, as I believe Jesus intends for it to be practiced, is to be among a group of people who do share a close bond - a group of people committed to washing one another's feet in their spiritual lives, a group of people committed to sharing in Christ's sacrificial blood. It is simply a fact of human existence that I cannot share a close mutual fellowship with twenty thousand people. But I can choose to take time for the brethren in my local congregation, to be there for them, to take the time that it takes to build a close bond with them. Communion is not just a commemoration of Jesus' broken body and shed blood, but also a reminder of how we are in this together.

While the Scriptures don't tell us how communion must be done, I would suggest that the pattern Jesus gave us lends itself more toward "close" communion than toward the idea that sharing the bread and wine should be freely with any person who names the name of Christ.

We know that as Jesus' earthly ministry drew toward its close he had many followers - many who believed in him. Perhaps still a small group in comparison to the crowds gathering in Jerusalem, but certainly more than twelve. And yet, Jesus had a close circle of disciples who were much closer to Him than the rest of His followers. And among those twelve, a smaller group who seem to have been even closer.

When it came time to initiate the first communion, Jesus didn't choose a location where a large group of his disciples could gather. The participants invited to this communion were not random. They were his close friends, those who had demonstrated their dedication to following him. Although Jesus in his perfect knowledge knew that Judas Iscariot was a traitor, yet Judas Iscariot was up to that point demonstrating perfect fidelity as far as human eye could know, and so Judas was included. I would hope that none of us would believe that because Jesus did not invite His remaining followers to this communion service He was therefore judging them as not being His followers.

I'm not sure there is a better way than to follow the pattern Jesus demonstrated.

Thanks for helping me understand your thinking and I can see where you are coming from. It isn't as clear to me that Jesus teaching the 12 communion so they could disciple others is meant as guidance for how the church practices it. Why wouldn't, if we were to follow that pattern, communion be relegated to only 12? Or at least a similar number?

It does also seem like a worthy point, to me, that Jesus didn't exclude Judas. All present were invited to the communion table.

[joshuabgood]

I assume you do draw a line on who you commune with? If so, where do you draw that line?

My canned response is that we know what the two most important things are because they asked Jesus. And if those two most important things are centered I will commune with them. (Of.course the question is - well how do you know if those two most important conditions are filled.)

Yes. That is what I am asking.
Some of us have answers for that question.

And yet...Jesus didn't say more than that in that context. He didn't issue clarifying comments. In my view, if God is loved, and neighbors are treated charitably, the two main conditions are met. Perhaps, if some one is a disciple, and we see "discontinuity" with the above, rather than exclusion, the steps should be discipleship.

Whatever the case, that fact that you raised the lack of a commitment to "enemy love" as a possible 'disqualifier,' to me, holds some credibility. That feels more problematic to me than plenty of other things that usually serve as disqualifiers. However, I still feel, denying communion, is a judgement about the 'sainthood' of believers...and by extension, to my way of thinking, such things that would disqualify people, are in essence, litmus tests for true Christianity.

[Ernie]

Whatever the case, that fact that you raised the lack of a commitment to "enemy love" as a possible 'disqualifier,' to me, holds some credibility. That feels more problematic to me than plenty of other things that usually serve as disqualifiers. However, I still feel, denying communion, is a judgement about the 'sainthood' of believers...and by extension, to my way of thinking, such things that would disqualify people, are in essence, litmus tests for true Christianity.

Are you distinguishing between sainthood and true Christianity?