Why Only Baptized Christians Should Take Communion

In a recent worship service in our church, I invited all “baptized believers” to join us at the Lord’s Table. That prompted a question from several people: why say, “baptized believers?” Is baptism really a prerequisite for taking communion?

Of course, not all churches would answer this in the same way. But the majority of Christians throughout history have believed that only baptized people should participate in Eucharistic meal. I think it’s a biblical position, and here’s why.

Two Sacraments: Baptism and the Lord’s Table

There are two sacraments given to the church, baptism and the Lord's Table, but these serve different functions.[i]

Baptism is a one time event that signifies: 

•   identification with Christ,

•   initiation into the Christian faith, and

•   entrance into the Christian church. 

Lots of passages point this way, and I won't list them all, but think for example about the Great Commission (we are commanded to make disciples, baptizing them in the name of Father, Son, and Spirit – Matt. 28:19), or multiple references in Acts, where people are baptized in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:39, 8:16; 10:48), or the Epistles, where Paul speaks of being baptized into Christ and into the body (Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:5). Consider especially 1 Cor. 12:13 where Paul says that by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body. In other words, baptism is what identifies someone with Christ and unites someone to the church. We also see this in Acts 2, where people repent, believe, and are baptized and thus are "added" to the church (Acts 2:38-41). 

The Lord's Table, on the other hand, is an ongoing, repeatable event (“as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup do this in remembrance of me”) that signifies:

•   fellowship with Christ, 

•   continuance in the Christian faith, 

•   and unity with the Christian church. 

This is especially clear in 1 Cor. 10:16-17, where Paul says, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” This shows us that communion involves both a special fellowship (“participation”) with Jesus and symbolizes our unity with the “one body” of Christ (“we who are many are one body”).

The Sequence: Baptism Precedes Communion

So, while baptism is an initial profession of faith, the Lord's Table is an ongoing, continual, and repeated renewal of faith. But isn’t it dishonest for someone to participate in a renewal of faith, if they've never professed faith in baptism to start with?

Communion is also something of a pledge of renewed trust in Christ and obedience to him (which is one reason why Paul warns against eating or drinking unworthily in 1 Cor. 11:27). But it would be pretense for someone to take communion when they have not even taken the first step of obedience to Jesus in baptism. 

Then there's also the biblical pattern. The sequence is always baptism first, followed by communion. So in Acts 2, for example, it is only those who are baptized and added to the church in verse 41 who then participate in the breaking of bread in verse 42. In 1 Corinthians, when Paul talks at length about communion (in chapter 11), the assumption from earlier in the letter (chapter 1) is that he is writing to baptized Christians. There are no examples in Acts or the Epistles of unbaptized people taking communion. 

Add to this the witness of the church through the ages. While historical creeds and confessions don't settle the matter (Scripture does that!), they do give us some clear benchmarks for understanding how the church has historically understood doctrine. And from what I can tell, the majority of churches have either taught or assumed that baptism should precede communion. Of course, there are significant disagreements about the mode and timing of baptism – but almost all agree that baptism, however it is understood, must come first.

So, that’s why I invited “baptized believers” to share in the Table at our church. Stating it this way is helpful for a couple reasons. First of all, it’s a helpful reminder for parents that their kids should be baptized before taking communion. It’s also helpful for seekers and non-Christians who need a concrete way of discerning whether they are really converted Christians or not. Of course, being baptized itself doesn't make someone a Christian or necessarily prove they are. But making a public profession under the authority of a local church who affirms the reality of someone's conversion is an important step and a good safeguard against self-deception.

Their Significance: Making the Gospel Visible

Finally, let’s never forget that both baptism and the Lord’s Table are given by the Lord to make the gospel visible to the church and the world.

Baptism points to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. It’s a dramatic reenactment of the humiliation and exaltation of our Lord that signifies our union with him through faith. “Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:3-4). Baptism publicly declares that what is true of Christ is also true of all who trust in him. His story is our story, in his death we also died, and through his resurrection we receive life made new. 

The Lord’s Table, likewise, “proclaims the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Cor. 11:26). When we eat the broken bread and drink the fruit of the vine, we taste and see that the crucified and risen Savior is gracious and good. We embody our faith through the everyday acts of eating and drinking, showing that just as we’re dependent on bread for physical nourishment and strength, so also we trust in Christ and his finished work alone for salvation, spiritual life, and strength.

---

[i] I owe some of my ideas for this article to Jeremy Keever, whose thoughtful blog post on “Should I Take Communion if I Haven’t Been Baptized?” was helpful for me.   http://differentway4kids.blogspot.com/2011/03/should-i-take-communion-if-i-havent.html. Accessed March 15, 2013. 

This article was originally written for Christianity.com.

A Position Paper on Why Believer’s Baptism by Immersion Should Not Be a Requirement for Church Membership

In November of 2010, the elder team of Fulkerson Park submitted a proposed revision to our church constitution that, among other things, included a revision to our requirements for church membership. In the past, the requirements for membership at Fulkerson Park have been (1) a public profession of faith in Christ and (2) believer’s baptism by immersion. The elders are proposing that we no longer require believer’s baptism by immersion as a requirement for membership. In an effort to clarify what we are and are not proposing, and the reasons behind the proposal, we offer this position paper.

What are we proposing?

First of all, we want to clarify that we are not proposing a change in either our doctrine or practice of baptism, but rather a change in our requirements for membership.

1. Doctrine of baptism

Our doctrine of baptism is stated in Article 11 of our Statement of Faith: “We believe that baptism by immersion is to be administered to true believers in Jesus Christ.” This is still the belief of each of the elders at Fulkerson Park and we are not proposing a change to our doctrine.

What this means:
• We are not attempting to modify the accepted and official doctrinal position of Fulkerson Park on baptism.
• Though we will always seek to fairly represent other views, we will not be teaching a different doctrinal position on baptism, either from the pulpit, or in membership or Sunday school classes, or small groups.
• We will not allow others in leadership to publicly teach a different position on baptism.

2. Practice of baptism

Neither are we proposing any change to our actual practice of baptism in Fulkerson Park. Genuine believers differ in their practice of baptism in two significant ways: first of all in the subjects of baptism and secondly in the mode of baptism. Our position is that the proper subjects of baptism are believers in Jesus Christ (not unbelievers, not infants, and not young children) and that the proper mode of baptism is immersion (not pouring, and not sprinkling) in water.

What this means:
• We will not be baptizing infants or young children who are not able to make a credible profession of faith in Christ.
• We will not be practicing baptism through pouring or sprinkling, as opposed to immersion.

3. A change in membership requirements

Since we are not proposing to change either our doctrine or practice of baptism, what then are we proposing? Simply this: that agreement on our doctrine and practice of baptism not remain a requirement for membership at Fulkerson Park. In other words, this is a change in membership requirements, not in our doctrine or practice of baptism.

Why are we making this proposal?

The other question, then, is why are the elders making this proposal?

It is important to state again that this is not a sudden shift in the position of the elders, but something that has been under discussion among the elders for over two years, and was discussed by Fulkerson Park’s deacon team prior to the installation of elders. It is also important to state that all of Fulkerson’s elders (both current and former) approved of this proposal. This is also a decision that has been vetted with some of Fulkerson’s long-term members.

Here are the reasons for this proposal.

1. We want to keep the gospel central

The first reason for the proposal is the gospel. We want to be a gospel-centered church, that is, a church that builds its life and fellowship around the essential core of the Christian gospel, namely, God’s plan to redeem sinful humanity and the fallen world through the death of his Son Jesus Christ for our sins, his resurrection from the dead, and the work of the Spirit in our hearts. These are the doctrines that stand at the center of our faith, and we want them to stand at the center of our church as well. And we believe that making the gospel central means that we make unity about the gospel a higher value and greater priority than unity about secondary doctrines, which while they are important, many gospel-embracing Christians disagree upon – doctrines about such issues as election, predestination, spiritual gifts, or . . . baptism.

Augustine is quoted to have said, “In the essentials, let there be unity; in the non-essentials, let there be liberty; and in all things, let there be charity.” This is a good motto that does three things: (1) it safeguards the unity of the church in those things which are most necessary; (2) it safeguards the liberty of a believer’s conscience in those areas where we disagree; (3) it promotes the love of Christ for all other believers, regardless of our differences. We believe this statement and its implications reflect the heart of Christ himself, who receives and loves all true believers in Jesus, regardless of their disagreements over some issues.

2. The Scriptures command us to welcome other believers

Scripture exhorts us to have a similar attitude. In Paul’s words, we are to “welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you to the glory of God” (Romans 15:7). Notice, that we are to welcome one another as Christ has welcomed us. This means that we are to show the same hospitality, reception, warmth, love, and care to other believers that Christ has shown to us. And it is significant that Paul says this in a context in which believers were in serious disagreement with one another over secondary issues.

On the basis of this command, we can thus reason:
• If Christ has received us and welcomed us into his family by grace through faith alone;
• And if Christ has also, on this same basis, welcomed and received into his family brothers and sisters in Christ who hold a different position on baptism than we do;
• And if we are to receive or welcome one another in the same way that Christ has received or welcomed us;
• Then should we not welcome and receive into our church membership these fellow believers?

3. Believer’s baptism is not required for salvation . . . or membership into the universal church

Third, believer’s baptism is not required for salvation or membership into the universal church. It is clear in Scripture that we are saved by grace through faith alone. It is also clear that all who are joined to Christ by faith are also a part of the body of Christ, the universal church. Very few, if any, among us would want to say that believers who have held, or now hold, to a different position on baptism – people such as John Calvin, Martin Luther, George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, James Kennedy, R. C. Sproul, Sinclair Ferguson, or Tim Keller – are not a part of the family of God, the body of Christ, the universal church.

4. This is what heaven will be like

We should also consider this: when the Lord Jesus Christ returns to gather all believers to himself, to establish his eternal kingdom, and to sit down with us at the marriage supper of the Lamb, we do not believe that he will require Jonathan Edwards, or the multitudes of other believers who have not received believer’s baptism by immersion, to be re-baptized by immersion. We have no reason to believe that Christ will receive our paedobaptist brothers and sisters with any less enthusiasm and warmth than he will receive us.

On the contrary, heaven will be filled with believers who disagreed while on earth about many, many things, but who had in common their trust in Christ alone for the forgiveness of their sins and their eternal salvation.

Sooner or later, we will all be in fellowship with other believers whose doctrine and practice of baptism were different than ours. We simply believe that such should be the case now.

5. It is a serious thing to exclude someone from membership in the church

Finally, we believe that it is a serious thing to exclude someone from membership in the church. In Scripture, such exclusion is tantamount to excommunication – to saying, in effect, this person may not be a member of our church, because he or she is not a true believer in Christ (see, for example, the relevant passages in Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5). We realize, of course, that when Baptist churches exclude non-baptists from their membership, they do not usually mean to infer that such non-baptists are also non-Christians. But if we start with the premises of Scripture – that exclusion or excommunication carries with it this serious implication – it should give us second thought.

Conclusion

These are the reasons that the pastoral team of Fulkerson Park have unanimously proposed this revision to our Constitution as it relates to the requirements for church membership. We earnestly pray that the Lord and Head of the church, our Savior Jesus Christ, will continue to empower all of us to love one another with humble and sincere hearts.

Thank you so much for prayerfully considering this recommendation from the Council of Elders.

The Elders of Fulkerson Park Baptist Church