Commonion (totviisvia, a dlorm^), hi ordlnart terms, an association or agreement when several per- sons join and partake together of one thing ; hence iu application to the celebration of the Lord's Sapper se an act of fellowship among Christians (1 Cor. x, 1€): and it is to this act of participation or fellowship tlttt the word " communion,*' in the religioas sense, is now diiefly applied in the English language. In 2 Cor. vi 14, it takes the derived sense of concord. The ^ com- munion of the Holy Qhost"(2 Cor. xiii, 14) sl^nifiesthsl spiritual intercourse with Uie divine Spirit which Uk child of God maintains by faith and prayer. The Greek term has also a secondary meaning of besioical in chsr- ity, in other passages, where it is rendered ** contribu- tion," '* distribution," or " commnnicadoo" [wlkh see]. The word 4b elsewhere translated simply "fel- lowship" (q. v.). For a large number of treatises on tie subject, see Yolbeding, Index Dissertadommm^ p. 147 iq.
(1.) Commtiii»Ofi(jcoivitfvia) therefore "properly mesw the Martn^ something mcomtiMm with another. Heoce, in the Christian sense, it signifies the sharing dirim converse or intercourse (1 John i, 8) ; and as Uiis takes place, sacramentally, in the Lord's Snpper, the woid, in a third stage, signifies sl joint partie^Hition in a spir- itual sense of the body and blood of Christ, L e. of Ui Spirit (John vi, 68) in that sacrament (1 Cor. z, 16). Some explain the Kotvtavia in the Lord's Sapper lo be a communication of the * body and blood of Christ,' as though these were given by the Church to the re- ceiver, but the above account of the order h& which tii« senses of the word have grown out of one another shows that such an interpretation is untenable. The Church has not, nor pretends to give, anything u frt>m herself in that ordinance, but Christians cocne together to hold * communion' with eadi other, and with their (once-sacrificed) Lord, of the benefits of whose death, sacramentally exhibited, they are in a special, though only spiritual, manner then jMirtofart. * Communion* (roivoivm) is that which is songht and spiritually partaken of by the receiver, not that which is actually conveyed by any person as the giver. Of the several names by which the Sapper of the Lord has been at different times distingaished, that of the *■ Holy Communion' is the one i^ch the Church of England has adopted for her members. The Rabries, Articles, and Canons almost invariably employ this designation" (Eden). See Eucharist; Lord's Sur-
PBR.
(2.) In a historical sense, ^mmsmion denotes par- ticipation in the mysteries of the Christian reli^OB, and, of course. Church fellowship, with all its rigfati and privileges. Hence the term " ezoommonicatiaa."
COMMUNION
443
COMMUNION
In diis sense the word is nsed also with reference to the admission of persons to the Lord's Supper. This is said to be €peH when all are admitted who apply ; to be ttrict when confined to the members of a single society, or at least to members of the same denom- ination ; and it is mixed when persons are admitted from societies of diflRsrent denominations, on the pro- fession of their faith and evidence of their piety, as is the case in Protestant churches generally. The prin- cipal difficulty on this point arises between the strict B^tists and Psdo-baptists.
Close Communion, Qitetiion of, — Among the Bap- tists there is a controversy on the subject, in which the two parties (called Free and Strict Communion- ists) may be represented respectively by Robert Hall and by J. G. Fuller. The following statement, embrac- ing the substance of the controversy, is taken from Brown*s Encyclopcedia of ReUgious Kntwledge^ s. v.
(a) " The opinion of Mr. Hall that baptism is not a prerequisite to the participation of the Eucharist runs tiirough all his reasonings in favor of unrestricted communion, and is the real foundation on which they rest. His positions are the following : 1. The baptism of John was a separate institution from that appointed by Christ after his resurrection ; from which it follows that the Lord^s Supper was anterior to Christian bap- tism, and that the original communicants consisted entirely of such as had not received that ordinance. 2. That there is no such connection, either in the na- ture of things or by the divine institution, between baptism and the Eucliarist as renders it, under all cir- cumstances, indispensable that the former should pre- cede the latter. 8. That admitting this to be the pre- scribed order, and to be sanctioned by tlie uniform practice of the apostles, the case of pious PsBdo-bap- tists is a new case, calling for some peculiar treatment, in which we ought to regard rather the spirit than the letter of apostolic precedent. 4. That a schism in the Church, the mystical body of Christ, is deprecated in the New Testament as the greatest evil. 6. That a reception to Church fellowship of all such as God has received, notwithstanding a diversity of opinion and practice in matters not essential to salvation, is ex- pressly enjoined in the New Testament (Rom. xiv, 1- 5; XV, 1, 5-7). 6. That to withhold the Lord's Sup- per from those with whom we unite in other acts of Christian worship is a palpable inconsistency. And, U»tiy, that it is as impolitic as it is illiberal, being calculated to awaken a powerful prejudice, and place beyond the reach of conviction our Psado-baptist breth- ren, and to engender among the Baptists themselves a narrow and sectarian feeling, wholly opposed to the enlarged spirit of the present age (Complete Worke of Robert Baa, il, 207-280; also i, 288-604|.