A local Presbyterian church recently shared a Facebook post rejoicing that they had added several members to their rolls. This is certainly a joyous occasion and I genuinely pray for the continued well-being and growth of their congregation. I have great respect for their leadership and I count them as a faithful brethren, so I rejoice to see what God is doing in their midst.
However...
Their phrasing caught my eye. The caption stated that they had added a certain number of communing and non-communing members. The paedocommunionist in me instantly flared up like a bad case of hives. My wife and I, happening upon it at the same time, looked across the couch at each other with faces full of consternation. A good friend of mine, who happens to be PC, as well, screenshot it and sent it to me, expressing the same gut-wrenching feeling. We all had the same thought:
What is a non-communing member?
Now, I know what a non-communing member is, grammatically speaking. I am familiar with the technical, theological arguments that undergird the belief, so I understand the concept intellectually, but I just can't wrap my head around the idea. A non-communing member? Isn't that an oxymoron?
Let's take a mental step backwards for a moment, if you can, and really strip the issue down to its core. Forget about the theological terms, raging debates, and Federal Vision associations, and really think about that term. What is a non-communing member? Does the New Testament present or allow for such a concept?
1 Corinthians 12, which, in case you are unaware, immediately follows 1 Corinthians 11 (IYKYK), repeatedly emphasizes the unity of the Church. Following the theme of the entire letter, it hammers home almost redundantly the vital truth that the body of Christ is one, covenantally and mystically.
There are varieties of gifts, Paul says, but the same Spirit (Vs 4). There are varieties of service and activities, but the same Lord (Vs 5) and the same God (Vs 6). The same Spirit, we are told, dispenses gifts to each member of the body as He wills for the benefit of the whole body (Vs 11).
After offering this beautiful Trinitarian description of the Christian life of self-sacrifice, Paul proceeds to his famous metaphor of the Church as a body. Just as a body has many members and is yet one, so it is with the Church (Vss 12, 14, and 27). Paul mentions the foot (Vs 15), the ear (Vs 16), and the eye (Vs 17), insisting that every part of the whole is necessary, though different, the weaker parts receiving more honor (Vs 24) so that there is no division in the body (Vs 25).
And how are we brought into this one body? By our baptism (Vs 13).
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
So, according to St. Paul, if you have been baptized, then you have been joined to the body. Again, the language is both covenantal and mystical. Paul literally says that we have been made to drink of one Spirit. There is no sense in this passage (or throughout the rest of the New Testament, for that matter) of a halfway member. You are in the body or you are not. You are a living, functioning member of the Body, or you are not. There is no third category.
So, I repeat, what is a non-communing member? Are there two bodies? How could one possibly be a member of this one body without communing with the other members of the body, especially the Head?
Let's return to Paul's metaphor for a moment. What happens to a part of your body if it loses it connection to the rest of the body? It withers and dies, of course. What happens when circulation is cut off to a foot or a hand? Or, inversely, what happens if a part of the body is compromised due to disease or injury? It is cut off for the sake of the body.
With Paul's metaphor before us, we can see that union and communion are coextensive. There is no communion without union. There is no union without communion. If you have been joined to Christ, then you may, no, you must, commune with Him. The Eucharist (or Lord's Supper or Lord's Table) is not the only means of communing with our Savior and His Body, but it is the pinnacle and sign of such communion.
Practically speaking, of course, we understand that there are hypocrites in our midst. We know that some will prove themselves to be false professors by forsaking the Body, but we also recognize that we cannot read hearts or divine who is among the number of the elect, so we count all members in good standing with the Church as truly members of the Body of Christ.
So, in obedience to Paul's instruction to discern the Body (1 Corinthians 11:29), we commune with all members of the Body of Christ. We commune with our children, recognizing that they are members of the Body, which was precisely what we claimed when we baptized them. We commune with brethren from other denominations, recognizing that the Body of Christ is wider and deeper than our local congregations or specific historical Traditions. We commune with weaker brethren who have little theological knowledge or who repentantly struggle with sin, recognizing that the weaker members are, in fact, true members, and that they require more care. We exclude only those who exclude themselves from the Body of Christ by false doctrine or unrepentant sin, for we recognize that severing communion with--amputating--a professor of the Faith is a declaration that he is, in fact, no longer a member of the body.
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 1 Corinthians 12:27
It feels safe to say that Paul had no concept of a non-communing member.
Comments
Post a Comment