I think we’d find the answer to be, every time they met. When they met every day, they celebrated the Lord’s Supper every day (See Acts 2:46). It seems they did this in various homes.

Eventually, the church met weekly on a regular basis, on the “Lord’s Day”, and they celebrated the Lord’s Supper every week — every time they met (See Acts 20:7).

It appears the New Testament pattern for the church was to remember the Lord in the “breaking of bread” whenever they met, including when they met in homes.

Since you have responded to this thread, I’ll tell you a story about one of my spiritual grandfathers. In the biography of Dr. Gibson, once pastor of Walnut Street Baptist in Louisville, this story was told. His father in law once had people rip out some flowers planted for Easter because it was “too P____” (derogatory term for Catholics.

Baptists eschew weekly communion not because they’re anti-Catholic, but because they’re anti-Campbellite!

But this has always been a problem. I’m far less concerned that an unconverted teen might take communion than I am that hundreds of Christians are denied the supper entirely.

I’m not really that up on all the details of the LCMS closed communion issue, but I understand some of the historic Lutheran reasons why, I think.

From what I understand, and it may be little, any enlightenment would be appreciated, but it has to do with the real presence issue, even in difference to the Reformed. But I don’t find the Lutherans closed communion offensive, even if it means me. I would hope to understand why rather than just pick a side and defend it. I respect deeply why they do. Though not perfect, most that follow out of Luther defend and proclaim more than any denomination I know of the real Gospel in purity. And I say that even of my present denomination, it’s clear as day, even if I don’t understand and thus don’t adhere to everything they say. It goes back to seeking Christ crucified and risen truly for me/one in all things and not even my own present denominational adherences.

I’ll give you an example of what I mean: I was once given a book of my former denomination to read. The title was “Why I Am A _______” (the denomination in the blank left out). So I read it. A few years later I picked up a very similar book entitled “Why I Am A Lutheran”, and I’m not a Lutheran. What struck me between the two, honestly, and neutrally, was the difference in the sum of what the two books said. The first book was essay after essay of “the great X tradition”, “the great X history”, “the great suffering of X”, “the great stands X have taken”, etc. The Lutheran book was absolutely pregnant with Christ and Him crucified, the Gospel, the forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake, the righteousness of Christ given, and any mention of the tradition was so to merely point out Christ again crucified. I was shocked at the difference for it was clear what each truly communicated and both books were saying “Why I Am A Something” books.

Now I know that no denomination or church is perfect, I have no such foolish notions. But it is crystal clear when one hears the Gospel preached, taught and proclaimed in everything and not, the over all message given is always clear in its parts and summary, this is not rocket science. And one can argue about what belongs to the Gospel message and what is not to defend non-gospel preaching calling it Gospel. BUT, at the end of the day, regardless of labels, the essence of message X is either Christ crucified and His righteousness for you or it is not and over thrown rather subtly and mostly post-conversion. One is either literally Christ alone always and forever or it is Christ + something else even if that something else is slipped in later as a post conversion over throw of the Gospel message. Opposing sides may argue the former and the later they give is the real Gospel respectively, but make no mistake the messages are clearly two different messages and thus two different opposing religions. Thus, Paul warns not of “legalism” but “another gospel” as it will be labeled “gospel”. It’s very telling why the Apostle did this numerous times.

So if they are protecting the Gospel in the Lord’s Supper, even if I don’t understand it myself right now, I deeply respect that because it guards life…eternal life, I don’t care who else doesn’t like it nor one wit of the GREAT tradition of X, Y or Z.

Blessings,

Larry