Taking the Lord's Supper to the Homebound

[Marrow Man]

I'm not sure if all denominations allow for the practice of taking the Lord's Supper to members who are homebound. The normal way of doing this is to bring at least an elder with you in ARP circles. I'm wondering which other denominations do or do not have this practice.

I have a followup question as well: what if the homebound person has Alzheimer's disease? Does this pose a problem with regard to self-examination? And what if it is a homebound couple? Do you take it to one and not the other?

Any helpful advice here would be appreciated.

 

[PresbyDane]

Here you can phone the pastor and request it, and he will come

 

[Theognome]

Alzheimer's shouldn't be an issue- The ravages of disease upon the mind do not change what the Lord has done to the heart. As long as an elder is present to properly administer the sacrament I have no qualms- although if others from the church could come along so that there is a gathering of the saints on the house-bound Christian's behalf, it would be a big plus. The supper without fellowship seems rather distant in some ways.

Theognome

 

[MW]

Private communion was imposed on the Church of Scotland in 1618 and opposed by true blue Presbyterians ever since.

 

[Marrow Man]

Lest anyone think that I my thinking is out of accord with Westminster, here are some relevant quotes:

The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to declare his word of institution to the people, to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use; and to take and break the bread, to take the cup, and (they communicating also themselves) to give both to the communicants; but to none who are not then present in the congregation. -- WCF 29.3

However, there is this amendment in the ARP's Confession of Faith:

Relating to Chapter XXIX, paragraph 3—“It is recognized that the statement, ‘but to none who are not then present in the congregation,’ is included here to oppose private celebrations of the Mass, and with this the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church is in harmony. However, the carrying and administering of the elements of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to worthy persons prevented from attendance upon the public administration of the sacrament is deemed advisable and in accord with the principles of Scripture.”

And this from our newly adopted Directory of Public Worship:

In the case of those who are physically unable to attend public worship, the sacrament may be taken to them. If possible, there should be present at the celebration officers and other members of the congregation in addition to the minister, to show forth the communal nature of the Sacrament. 8.c.(9)

I realize this is very "ARP specific." In light of Rev. Winzer's comments, I am curious as to the practice of other American Presbyterian denominations (or other Reformed bodies).

 

[Classical Presbyterian]

I serve home communion with elders, as an extension of the worship life of the church. For my thinking, if a person is so far gone that they do not know who they are or what they are doing, then they really are not in need of communion.

Calvin taught that the sacraments were for our assurance in our weakness. People who are mentally disabled really do not 'need' to have the Lord's Supper in my pastoral opinion.

It's a tough call for those disabled by Alzheimer's. Pray, consult the elders and do as you feel led. I don't know if there is any 'wrong' answer if you have spent the time in prayer and acted on what you were led to.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Here are my notes on changes to WCF 29.3. The qualification/exception sought seems to be the church comes to the individual; otherwise it is a private communion.

(1) PCUS(1963) deleted “but to none who are not then present in the congregation.” (2) ARP(1959) adopted note ‘h’ (see Appendices, p. 246), allowing for carrying and administering of the Lord’s Supper to “worthy persons” unable to attend public services. In this country, as early as 1835, Samuel Miller allowed for this with careful qualification. American churches since then allow it with varying restrictions, addressing the issue otherwise than within the Confession itself. In his commentary on the Confession, G. I. Williamson summarizes the necessary qualifications for the practice: “The sacrament of the Lord's Supper may be administered in private homes, provided there is an assembly of believers, and provided there is faithful preaching of the Word and the administration of church discipline in that place also.” See: RPCNA Testimony at 29.4; OPC Directory for the Public Worship of God (2000) IV.A.3; PCUSA Book of Order 2002-2003, W-2.4010; PCA Minutes of the 7th General Assembly (1979) 102; Samuel Miller, D.D. Presbyterianism the truly primitive and Apostolical Constitution of the Church of Christ (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1835) 90-92; G. I. Williamson, The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1964) 223-224.

Lest anyone think that I my thinking is out of accord with Westminster, here are some relevant quotes:

The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to declare his word of institution to the people, to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use; and to take and break the bread, to take the cup, and (they communicating also themselves) to give both to the communicants; but to none who are not then present in the congregation. -- WCF 29.3

However, there is this amendment in the ARP's Confession of Faith:

Relating to Chapter XXIX, paragraph 3—“It is recognized that the statement, ‘but to none who are not then present in the congregation,’ is included here to oppose private celebrations of the Mass, and with this the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church is in harmony. However, the carrying and administering of the elements of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to worthy persons prevented from attendance upon the public administration of the sacrament is deemed advisable and in accord with the principles of Scripture.”

And this from our newly adopted Directory of Public Worship:

In the case of those who are physically unable to attend public worship, the sacrament may be taken to them. If possible, there should be present at the celebration officers and other members of the congregation in addition to the minister, to show forth the communal nature of the Sacrament. 8.c.(9)

I realize this is very "ARP specific." In light of Rev. Winzer's comments, I am curious as to the practice of other American Presbyterian denominations (or other Reformed bodies).

 

[MW]

David Calderwood (Perth Assembly, p. 101):

The comforts of the infirm ministered out of order doth rather foster the public infirmity of the Kirk than heal the private infirmity of the sick.

 

[VictorBravo]

David Calderwood (Perth Assembly, p. 101):

The comforts of the infirm ministered out of order doth rather foster the public infirmity of the Kirk than heal the private infirmity of the sick.

That is how our LBCF church views it as well. We hold that communion is for the congregation as a body.