No. 17 You just referred to something a moment ago which has often puzzled me. If the Lord�s Supper is the giving of the forgiveness of sins, should then not everybody be able to receive it? How do we find compatibility between the Supper as a means of grace and our doctrine of close communion? >>PROFESSOR ROLAND ZIEGLER: That's a touchy point for many, Nick, the doctrine of closed Communion. Because if you deny somebody Communion, you seem to be very sectarian or very snobby. There sometimes seems to be a very exclusive kind of country club and you pride yourself or you feel even better by excluding other people. You don't get Communion here. And the people who are refused Communion feel like second class Christians or as if their Christianity is denied. And there's a lot of hurt in that point. That's the one point, just the human point. But the other point you mentioned is also important. Well, doesn't that make the Lord's Supper into something which is no longer Gospel but rather something that is preconditioned by our works, that we believe the right thing or have the right membership? The problem here is that two things come together in that discussion. The one thing is: Who should receive the Lord's Supper? If you look at the nature of the sacrament, we can start with the question in Luther's Small Catechism when he says: Who receives the sacrament worthily and answers in fasting and bodily preparation are certainly fine in outward training. But the person is truly worthy and well prepared who has faith in these words "Given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins." But anyone who does not believe these words or doubts them is unworthy and unprepared for the words. For you require all hearts to believe. What Luther does here is that his stress that faith in the words is required for the proper worthy salvific reception of the Lord's Supper. And that shows you one difference: The preaching goes to everybody. I mean, we don't card people before they come to the service. And if you're not a Christian, you can't attend. To the contrary we try to get everybody in the service. Because it's a missionary opportunity. The preaching is for everybody. The Lord's Supper is not for everybody. The Lord's Supper was instituted in a meal with Jesus' disciples. It's different from the feeding of the 5,000, for example, where just everybody gets something. The Lord's Supper is for the disciples. The Lord's Supper for its worthy reception requires faith in these words. Luther stresses the words "Given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins" because he says that's at the center. If you don't believe that here you receive the body and blood of Christ given and shed for the forgiveness of sins, you don't have faith. So faith in these words, that is in the Words of Institution, is required. Now, we have to realize that this means that you have faith in the -- in all the Words of Institution. In the entire Words of Institution. Not just in a few. You can't mark that down. You can't say, "Oh, yes, dear Jesus, I believe that somehow you shed your blood for me. But of course I don't believe that I receive forgiveness of sins here. And I certainly do not believe that this is the body and blood of Christ." If somebody denies the truth of the Words of Institution, he does not have the faith that is required. Which means he does not receive these words in faith. And if you don't receive the words in faith, how should you be able to receive the Lord's Supper to your benefit? So from the nature of the Lord's Supper, we cannot commune those who reject the Words of Institution, who do not believe that they receive the true body and blood of Christ here or who do not believe that they are in need of the forgiveness of sins. That excludes quite a few people. That does not mean that we say, "You are not Christians." But we say, "You are right now not ready to receive to your benefit the Lord's Supper." And again, we have to remember that if it's really the body and blood of Christ, you actually are concerned that people do not receive it to their damnation, which would be not in unbelief. Because it would be -- this would be worse than not receiving it at all. So it's not some kind of a snobbish attitude but it is borne out of the concern for the welfare for these people that we practice closed Communion. There is another line that is to be looked at in this context. Besides from the argument from the nature of the Lord's Supper, we have to argue also Ecclesialogically -- and probably the same question will come up in your question on church and ministry. But it's an important question. So if there's some repetition, don't worry. Christ commands us that we avoid false prophets in Matthew 7:15. And also Paul admonishes us that we avoid a man who is a heretic, that is a false teacher, after he is admonished once or twice and we have to mark and void those who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine the Christians have learned. Saint John in his second letter says that those who have another doctrine of Christ should not be received into the house or are greeted. This means that those who confess a different faith than the faith of Holy Scripture cannot be simply admitted to the Lord's Supper. Again, that sounds awfully arrogant. It's like "Well, do you think you have the truth?" Well, in a way, yes. We do believe that there is truth and that we can know it. We are willing to discuss that question. But we are not relativists. We don't say: Oh, well, nobody can know really what Christ actually wants us to do or means. And many of our Christian friends of our denominations don't believe that, either. They have very strong views on certain issues. If they are conservative evangelicals, they have very strong views on homosexuality. If you would tell them "Well, can you be sure that this is not right in the eyes of God," they will tell you "Of course I can. I'll show it to you in Scripture." But if we come and say, "Well, you know in the Lord's Supper you believe wrongly," they might be offended. So if you discuss with people that actually have strong dogmatic convictions, at least you can come to the point where you say, "Okay. You might understand that differently. But you and I agree in the fact that truth can be known." And it is important to really follow Holy Scripture. You might see it now differently. And you might think I'm wrong. And I believe you are wrong. And therefore, I do not have real fellowship with you. And therefore, also, I cannot meet you at the Lord's Supper. Because the Lord's Supper is the most intimate Communion we have. If you practice open Communion, that is you admit people to the Lord's Supper because -- well, why? Mostly it's some kind of generic confession. "Well, I believe that Jesus Christ is my Lord." That's good. That's very good if somebody says that. But if they say, "Of course I do not believe all of that mumbo jumbo about the real presence" or "I don't believe in infant baptism," you can say, "Oh, that's okay. You don't have to." Who gives you the right to dispense somebody to believe actually everything that Christ has taught? So open Communion leads to doctrinal indifferentism. That is ultimately it doesn't matter what you believe or to a minimalism: Well, certain things you should believe but the rest is up for grabs. And if you look at the history of Christianity wherever open Communion is practiced, the first thing that really dies is the doctrine of the real presence. If you commune people who do not believe in the real presence, you make thereby the statement: It's optional. You don't have to believe it. It really -- it's really not a big deal. If you commune people who believe differently in other matters, you also say: Well, yeah, you might be for women's ordination or gay marriage. But we can still come together at the table. So it's not really a big deal. That's really what you say. And you have to be aware of that. So besides those admonitions in the New Testament to avoid false teachers, what you do with open Communion is you really destroy the dogmatical substance of a church. I do know, again, it's pretty hard sometimes, especially with family. And it is also pretty hard with people who are decent and maybe conservative Lutherans but they are in a different church with which we are not in fellowship. And I think that's the real problem. If a Baptist comes and wants to commune, you can pretty easily say: Okay, you don't believe what we believe. And you come up here and you really reject our confession of faith. So don't you think it's kind of hypocritical to come to Communion? But it is much harder when you have somebody who is a member of the ELCA. And we all know the stories. You're a member of the ELCA. There is no LCMS church there, for example. Or they are just, you know, old conservative members of let's say the ALC that find themselves in the ELCA. And they don't like what is going on. And you feel pretty close to them. And they are pretty close to you in their confession of faith. And then you say to them: Well, too bad. But I can't commune you. The reason for that, that even there you say, "Okay. We can't simply hush over that" is they give with their membership in the ELCA a witness that: Well, it might be bad. But we can still be all together in a church. And that's not right. And that's the point I think which is the most difficult to communicate. That church membership actually does matter. That the membership in a church or that is in a wider church or in a Synod, has a spiritual component. It's very difficult because people oftentimes think very parochial. "It's my congregation. And if things are going well there, then okay, it serves me." But with whom you are in fellowship is a spiritual matter. And to separate from false teaching is not optional. It is commanded by Christ and his apostles. So we have to work with people. And we have to be gentle. But we have to try of course to win them. Because that's the point. Okay. When you practice closed Communion we are not standoffish. It's not "Yeah, we are right. You are wrong. And to hell with you." No. It's actually a very painful reminder that there are these doctrinal differences among us. That there is no unity which should urge us to come to unity. So the point is not simply to exclude people because you belong in some kind of strange purity cult. It is rather to give people in heterodox churches a sign "Hey, not everything is right" and try to win them over. That means that a person from a heterodox church comes to you, he is not excommunicated. You can only excommunicate people who are members of your church. But his Communion privileges -- if you want to put it like that, his Communion fellowship is suspended. If he wants to commune, that's fine. But then you have to say: Okay, do you confess the faith? And every confession of the faith entails that you reject errors. You can't say, "Yeah, I believe that. But you know, really other opinions are right, too." I mean as long as you put it like that, you realize, you know, there is just something wrong with that. That's not a very strong confession. You don't whole heartedly believe that. If somebody says, "Yeah, I believe in Christ. But you know, other people in other cultures, they have their way to heaven," that's a different Christ you confess. That's a different way how you relate to Christ. Christ is then not the way and the truth but a way and a truth. And the same thing with the Lord's Supper. If you say, "Well, I believe that you receive the body and blood of Christ. But who can be sure?" That's not faith. Faith is sure of it. "Well, I think my sins are forgiven but maybe not." That's not faith. So what we do when we practice closed Communion -- and by the way, sometimes there's a difference made between closed Communion and close Communion. Well, historically the terms are really interchangeable. But closed Communion is sometimes avoided because it seems so sectarian. What you do when you practice closed Communion is that you witness for the truth. That in the midst of the division of the church you say: These divisions do matter. Truth can be known. And what we believe is not just a human opinion. But this is what the Word of God says. Yes, it is a stumbling block and it hurts. But in a way it is a preaching of the law. As any preaching of the law, it is not to -- simply to hurt or to offend people. But it is to call them to repentance. And that's why it is not an unloving thing to practice closed Communion. But it really is a loving thing. It's maybe tough love. But it is love. It's not hate, narrow mindedness or anything like that. So we receive the forgiveness of sins. And it is for all. It is for all who believe what Christ says. And we invite everybody to believe all that Christ has said.