Grace Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, Elgin, Texas

What's Going On in the Missouri Synod?

Additional citations from the Bible and the Lutheran Confessions not included in the study materials are linked to this document and will open in a separate window.

Closed or Open Communion

Closed communion is the Scriptural practice of refusing to give Lord’s Supper to those with whom we are not completely united in doctrine and practice.

Open communion is the practice of welcoming to the Lord’s Supper those with whom there is not unity in doctrine and practice. Open communion will be see in varying degrees depending on how much disunity is allowed.

Concerning communion with non-Christians

1 Corinthians 10:20-21, “No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons.”

2 Corinthians 6:14-15 “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? ¹⁵ What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?”

Concerning communion with the openly unrepentant

1 Corinthians 5:11-13 “But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. … ‘Expel the wicked man from among you.’”

1 Corinthians 11:27-28, “Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. ²⁸ A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.

Concerning communion with those who do not confess the presence of Christ’s Body and Blood

1 Corinthians 11:29-32, “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. ³¹ But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. ³² When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.”

Concerning communion with those for whom there is not unity in doctrine and practice

Acts 2:42 “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.”

1 Corinthians 1:10 “I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.”

1 Corinthians 11:26, “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

Romans 16:17 I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

The synod has repeatedly upheld that closed communion is the only Scripturally and Confessionally faithful practice.

“The practice of refusing Communion to certain Christians and the general population at Lutheran altars is called close Communion. This practice serves the Gospel, and even those refused, by its reverence for our Lord's last will and testament….

Since fellowship at the Lord's Table is also confession of a common faith, it would not be truthful for those who affirm the Real Presence and those who deny it to join one another. Their common Communion would indicate to the non-Christian community that the last will and testament of Christ could be interpreted in contradictory ways. Indeed, the non-Christian might rightly ask whether it was Jesus' word which determined the church's position and practice or simply a human consensus….

Close Communion seeks to prevent a profession of confessional unity in faith where there is, in fact, disunity and disagreement. It would be neither faithful to the Scriptural requirements for admission to Holy Communion (1 Cor. 11: 27 ff.; cf. 10:16-17) nor helpful to fallen humanity if the Christian church welcomes to its altars those who deny or question clear Scriptural teachings” (Theology and Practice of The Lord’s Supper, CTCR,1983).

In actual practice, there are many congregation and even whole Districts in which it seems that open communion is the rule.

In May of 1997, the Florida-Georgia District in Convention approved A Declaration of Eucharistic Understanding and Practice (DEUP), in which it stated that there should be no “denominational requirement of baptized Christians who desire to receive the body and blood of Christ offered in the Lord’s Supper.” This open admission of open communion by an entire district generated some 30 Synodical overtures in 1998. Most sought to reaffirm Synod’s position or reject this document, but five were in support of open communion. The Northwest District declared, “A practice congruent with Scripture and the Confessions calls for the Sacrament to be shared with baptized Christians who repent of their sins, believe the real presence, and sincerely intend to amend their sinful lives” (Rev. 3-04).

At the 1998 Synodical Convention, a resolution was passed “To Recognize Action of Florida-Georgia District as Null and Void” (3-06A), “because it is contrary to the resolutions of the Synod which have consistently upheld the truth, "that pastors and congregations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, except in situations of emergency and in special cases of pastoral care, commune individuals of only those Lutheran synods which are now in fellowship with us" (1967 Res. 2-19; see also 1977 Res. 3-12; 1981 Res. 3-04; 1983 Res. 3-12; 1986 Res. 3-08; 1989 Res. B; 1992 Res. B; 1995 Res. 3-08).

Though the Synod in 1998 turned back this assault on closed communion and included a good critique of DEUP in the 1999 CTCR document, “Admission to the Lord’s Supper,” the position expressed by these Districts has never been rescinded by those Districts in question.

Here are the words of our Synodical President, in Part I of The President’s Report to the 2004 Synodical Convention:

“In my travels across the Synod, I have not encountered disagreement in the doctrine of what the Lord's Supper is. With unanimity, we believe, teach, and confess the Real Presence of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, received in, with, and under the bread and wine of Holy Communion, for the forgiveness of sin, the strengthening of faith, and the assurance of life eternal through faith in Christ. I do not believe that fundamental doctrinal disagreement concerning what the Lord's Supper is exists in the LCMS.

At the same time, significant disagreement exists in the Synod regarding the policies of admission to Holy Communion, namely, who should be allowed or even encouraged to receive the Sacrament at the altars of our LCMS congregations. Some believe that all baptized Christians who believe in Jesus Christ, who are penitent, who accept the Real Presence of our Lord's body and blood, and who desire to amend their sinful lives should be welcome at our altars. Others believe that only members of LCMS congregations and congregations of other church bodies with whom the LCMS is in altar and pulpit fellowship should be communed at our altars, with no exceptions.

The official position of our Synod, which welcomes members of LCMS congregations and congregations of church bodies with whom we are in altar and pulpit fellowship, also understands this policy to include "the necessity of exercising responsible pastoral care in extraordinary situations and circumstances" in the communing of "Christians who are member of denominations not in fellowship with the LCMS" (1986 LCMS Convention Resolution 3-08). There is significant disagreement about what constitutes "extraordinary situations and circumstances," which some pastors and congregations interpret very broadly and others quite narrowly.

This disagreement in practice has resulted in dissension and disharmony between pastors and congregations of the LCMS, even though they are otherwise agreed on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper.

It is important to recall the words of Francis Pieper, fourth President of the LCMS:

Christian congregations, and their public servants, are only the administrants and not lords of the Sacrament....On the one hand, they are not permitted to introduce 'Open Communion'; on the other hand, they must guard against denying the Sacrament to those Christians for whom Christ has appointed it. (Christian Dogmatics, III, p. 381)

Here are the words of our Synodical President, in Part III of The President’s Report to the 2004 Synodical Convention:

“Much of that disharmony has resulted from doctrinal difficulties, as our Synod has struggled, among other issues, with the fine line between being confessional and becoming sectarian. Other disagreements have been practical, namely, how our pure doctrine is to be applied. And many of our struggles concern what appear today to be minor issues but in the past were anything but minor. For example, in the LCMS:

It once was considered a sin to purchase life insurance.
Membership in the Boy Scouts of America was not allowed.
Lutheran musicians could not play the organ or other musical instruments in non-Lutheran weddings or funerals and some were even excommunicated for doing so.
Lutherans were not allowed to dance and were often chastised and even excommunicated for doing so.
Lutheran pastors and people were not allowed to pray with anyone, anytime, anywhere, outside our own church.
Women were not allowed to sit in church together with the men.
Many congregations were in conflict over whether the pastor should continue to preach and teach in German or should begin to do so in English.

Today our Synod views these practices from the past, staunchly defended on the basis of Holy Scripture at the time, as matters not specifically commanded or forbidden in Holy Scripture and thus matters of Christian freedom about which there is little, if any, current dissension….

Yet, our Synod endured in remaining true to our Scriptural and Confessional principles. While most of the issues mentioned above are no longer in contention, we nevertheless continue to experience in our Synod today difficulty, disagreement and even conflict regarding numerous other issues, mostly regarding the practical application of our doctrinal principles. A few examples will suffice:

Close Communion - There is little if any disagreement among us on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper. But there is disagreement regarding the policies of admission to Holy Communion, namely, who should be allowed or even encouraged to receive the sacrament at the altars of our congregations, campus ministries and military chaplaincies…. {Here he also mentions “Church and Ministry,” “Traditional and Contemporary Worship,” and “The Service of Women in the Church.”}

Perhaps your congregation or one in your Circuit is wrestling with one or more of these issues, which can become divisive.”

These two reports may not be considered LCMS doctrinal statements, but they are our Synodical President’s officially published report. Their contents were not disputed. By these words, a wedge is driven between doctrine and practice. The practice of closed communion is compared with so-called long abandoned practices of bygone eras. Emergency exceptions for those on the death bed or in a state of confession are now opened to “pastoral discretion.”

The foregoing material developed by and used with permission of Trinity Lutheran Church, Herrin, Illinois.

6 Points

2. Contemporary Worship