Unity in the Meal: Inter-Communion

The debate does not end here, however. Within today’s Christian community questions also arise concerning how the Supper should be celebrated between different Protestant denominations. While some strongly advocate open intercommunion between all regenerate believers regardless of denominational affiliation, such as Thorogood and Jungel, others believe that communion should be restricted to specific local congregations, a view which John Hammett champions. Both camps present strong, well thought-out and defended cases for their view, citing both Scriptural evidence and practical implications. To ascertain a potential best practice one must again closely examine both cases through the filter of Scripture.
Zizioulas writes that the Eucharist cannot be studied as a closed object, apart from the content of the Church (Zizioulas, 17). In the New Testament, ekklesia is not a term given for just any congregation but for Eucharistic assemblies (Zizioulas, 46). In other words, Paul held the Church to be more than just a geographical or theoretical concept; the Church was the body of Christ which partakes in the observance of the Lord’s Supper. Scripture presents the communion of believers with each other as a major feature of the Supper. There is a real, though imperfect, bond between all who have been brought into God’s family through baptism (House of Bishops, 6). Christ’s prayer in the Gospel of John demonstrates His desire for unity in the Church further witnessed in the Book of Acts. “The unity of the Church is seen, first and foremost, as a unity in the person of Christ, as incorporation into Him and His increase or building-up,” (Zizioulas, 16). Zizioulas further argues that the connection of the Lord’s Supper with the awareness that the “many” are united by the One who offered Himself on their behalf is a concept dating back to the very beginnings of Christianity itself, continuing that the metaphors for the Church (i.e. flock, body, building) are meaningless in one’s understanding of the Church outside of the “many” being united into “one” (Zizioulas, 54).
The argument follows that as the ordinance and sign of unity, the Eucharist presupposes that those who take part are united in the common faith and one Baptism (Kasper, 109). From a Catholic perspective this fellowship and unity with Christ in the Eucharist has always been seen in the larger context of the fellowship, or “communio,” of the church. Kasper argues that:

Paul writes that the sharing in the one chalice and the one bread gives us a share
in the death and resurrection of Christ and binds us to one another so that we form
the one body of the Lord, which is the church. The Eucharist does not institute
this fellowship, since it presupposes the fellowship which has already been bestowed
by Baptism; rather, the Eucharist actualizes, renews, and deepens it (Kasper, 136).