What is open vs closed communion?
Question 09009
The distinction between open and closed communion is one that many churchgoers encounter without fully understanding. It determines who is welcome at the Lord’s Table when a church celebrates the Supper, and the answer a church gives reveals something about how it understands the nature of the church, the ordinances, and the boundaries of Christian fellowship.
Defining the Terms
The terminology can be confusing because it is used in slightly different ways by different traditions. In general usage, open communion means that any professing believer in Christ is welcome to participate in the Lord’s Supper, regardless of their denominational affiliation, baptismal status, or church membership. The table belongs to Christ, not to any particular congregation, and all who belong to Christ are welcome at His table. Closed communion (sometimes called “close communion”) restricts participation to members of that specific local church, or to members of churches within the same denomination or network. The strictest form limits the table exclusively to members in good standing of the local congregation.
Some traditions operate with a middle position, sometimes called close communion (as distinct from “closed”), which welcomes believers from other congregations of like faith and practice while stopping short of a fully open table. The distinctions can seem hair-splitting, but they reflect genuine differences in how the relationship between the Lord’s Table and the local church is understood.
The Case for Open Communion
The New Testament presents the Lord’s Supper as the table of the Lord, not the table of a particular congregation. Paul writes to the Corinthians about “the Lord’s Supper” (1 Corinthians 11:20) and “the table of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 10:21). The possessive is Christ’s, not the church’s. If the table belongs to Christ, then all who belong to Christ have a rightful place at it. The requirement Paul establishes for participation is self-examination (1 Corinthians 11:28), not membership in a specific congregation or denomination. He does not instruct the Corinthian elders to verify the membership credentials of each participant. He instructs each person to examine themselves.
The unity of the body of Christ also supports an open table. Paul’s point in 1 Corinthians 10:17 is that “because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” The Supper is a declaration of the church’s unity in Christ. To exclude genuine believers from the table on the basis of denominational boundaries introduces a division that the Supper itself is meant to overcome.
The Case for Closed Communion
Those who practise closed communion argue that the Lord’s Supper is a function of the local church’s gathered worship and that participation implies a shared commitment to the doctrine and discipline of that congregation. If a believer from another tradition participates, they are, in a sense, making a statement of fellowship that may not be accurate. They may hold doctrinal positions the local church regards as erroneous, or they may not be under the pastoral oversight and discipline that the local church exercises over its own members. Closed communion maintains the integrity of the local church’s fellowship and ensures that participation reflects genuine, accountable membership.
There is also an argument from church discipline. If a member of a local church is under discipline and is excluded from the table, but can simply walk to another church and participate there, the discipline is undermined. Closed communion preserves the seriousness of the church’s pastoral oversight.
Where the Balance Lies
The New Testament evidence favours an open table. The requirement is faith in Christ and honest self-examination, not membership in a particular congregation. The table belongs to Christ, and those who belong to Him through faith are welcome at it. The practical concerns raised by closed communion advocates are genuine but are better addressed through clear teaching about the meaning and seriousness of the Supper than through restricting access to it. A church that explains the Supper clearly, warns against unworthy participation, and invites all believers in right relationship with God and with others to participate is honouring both the openness of the gospel and the seriousness of the ordinance.
This does not mean the table is open to everyone without qualification. It is open to believers. Unbelievers should be graciously informed that the Supper is for those who have trusted Christ. Believers living in unrepentant, public sin may need to be counselled privately about whether they should participate. But the default posture of the church at the Lord’s Table should be one of generous welcome to all who belong to Christ, not restrictive gatekeeping based on denominational boundaries.
So, now what?
If you belong to Christ through faith, the Lord’s Table is for you, wherever you find yourself worshipping. If you are visiting a church that practises closed communion, respect their practice, even if you disagree with it. If your own church practises open communion, receive it as a reflection of the breadth of Christ’s body and the generosity of His invitation. And wherever you take the bread and the cup, do so with a heart that has been honestly examined and a spirit that is grateful for the grace the table represents.
“Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” 1 Corinthians 10:17 (ESV)
