Those convinced of the confessional Presbyterian & Reformed view of close/confessional communion might find themselves conscience-bound by the Word of God to abstain from participation in an improperly administered sacrament. 

The usual standard for admission to the Lord’s Supper in Orthodox Presbyterian Church congregations (and in congregations of other NAPARC denominations) is that the would-be communicant have a credible profession of faith in the gospel, live penitently, and be a baptized member of a gospel-believing church. The confessional Presbyterian & Reformed view of close communion or confessional communion is not widely known or understood today.  Below, this close/confessional view is described in contrast to usual OPC practice, and some Scriptural and doctrinal support for it is presented.
The OPC BD 2.B.2. states “The session shall examine the candidate for [communicant] membership to assure itself so far as possible that he [or she] possesses the knowledge requisite for active faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, relies for salvation on the work of Christ alone, is trusting Christ for salvation, and is determined by the grace of God to lead a Christian life.”
The OPC DPW 3.C.3. states “The minister shall then declare who may come to, and who are excluded from, the Lord’s Table according to the Word of God…. to invite all who are right with God and his church, through faith in the Lord Jesus, to come to the Lord’s Table. If you have received Christ and are resting upon him alone for salvation, as he is offered to you in the gospel, if you are a baptized and professing communicant member in good standing in a church that professes the gospel of God’s free grace in Jesus Christ, and if you live penitently and seek to walk in godliness before the Lord, then this Supper is for you, and I invite you in Christ’s name to eat the bread and drink the cup.”
The OPC DPW 4.A.1. states “Only those may be admitted to full [Supper] communion in the church who have been baptized and have made public profession of faith in Jesus Christ.”
The OPC DPW 4.B.2. states “The minister shall then require the person to profess publicly his Christian faith by giving assent to these or equivalent questions:

Do you believe the Bible, consisting of the Old and New Testaments, to be the Word of God, and its doctrine of salvation to be the perfect and only true doctrine of salvation?
Do you believe in one living and true God, in whom eternally there are three distinct persons—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit—who are the same in being and equal in power and glory, and that Jesus Christ is God the Son, come in the flesh?
Do you confess that because of your sinfulness you abhor and humble yourself before God, that you repent of your sin, and that you trust for salvation not in yourself but in Jesus Christ alone?
Do you acknowledge Jesus Christ as your sovereign Lord, and do you promise that, in reliance on the grace of God, you will serve him with all that is in you, forsake the world, resist the devil, put to death your sinful deeds and desires, and lead a godly life?
Do you promise to participate faithfully in this church’s worship and service, to submit in the Lord to its government, and to heed its discipline, even in case you should be found delinquent in doctrine or life?”

According to the above sections of the OPC BCO, as I understand it, and as is my experience of usual practice in OPC congregations, would-be participants are generally admitted to the Lord’s Supper on the basis of meeting several requirements:

Having received Christian baptism.
Having made a [credible] public profession of faith in Jesus Christ.
Living penitently [ie, not in unrepentant sin], seeking to live in a godly way.
Being a communicant member in good standing [ie, not under censure] of any church that “professes the gospel of God’s free grace in Jesus Christ.”

Specifically, the public profession of faith in Jesus Christ required of those who would be communicant members of the OPC includes several distinct affirmations:

Belief in the whole Bible as God’s Word.
Belief in the Bible’s teaching of salvation to be perfect and the exclusively-true teaching of salvation.
Belief in the Trinity and Jesus Christ’s identity as God the Son incarnate.
Confession of one’s sinfulness, self-abhorrence, humbling before God, and repentance of one’s sins.
Confession of one’s trust in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.
Acknowledgment of Jesus Christ as one’s Lord.
Promise to serve Jesus Christ entirely, to forsake the world, to resist Satan, to mortify sin, and to live in a godly way.
Promise to faithfully participate in the church’s worship and service.
Promise to submit to the church’s government and to heed its discipline in doctrine and life.

In addition to these things required of those admitted to the Supper in OPC congregations (as explained above), Scripture requires that those admitted to the Supper express affirmation (according to their ability) of the doctrinal standards of the church, not holding any principled objections to or disagreements with its teachings.
This includes a requirement that those admitted to the Supper express an understanding of the meaning and nature of the Supper (for example, as explained in OPC DW 3.C.2 and WCF 29.1, 7; WLC 168, 170), particularly Christ’s real, spiritual presence to those who participate in a worthy manner by faith, so that they are really spiritually nourished and strengthened by Him in the Supper. It may be the practice of some OPC congregations to require this, but it is not explicitly required in the OPC BCO (as far as I can tell).
Read More
Related Posts:

In the war of the mind, students need to master the tools of grammar, logic, and rhetoric that have been painstakingly developed since antiquity. They need the intellectual courage developed through real engagement with minds better than their own. 

In a time when crime and inflation are rising together, when independent nations are threatened by massive powers eager to consume them, and when dispassionate public discourse seems impossible, it’s bracing to remember the fairness and generosity that make justice and good judgment possible.
In the last few months, two friends have highly recommended a book by Carl Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self. Amazon lies in wait for readers like me, of course, so I now have it in hand. Trueman begins by asking how this sentence—“I am a woman trapped in a man’s body”—could make sense in the contemporary world and even elicit sympathy from ordinary people, whereas a generation or two ago it would have been met with pure incredulity. Trueman’s account takes him back into the thought of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and then through Marx, Darwin, Freud, Nietzsche, and others of contemporary importance, such as Judith Butler. I am still in the early chapters, but I can already add my recommendation.
His arguments aside, what strikes me with unusual force is Trueman’s articulation of his approach, because it goes to the heart of an institution like Wyoming Catholic College. In his introduction to the book, Trueman explains what he does as a historian of ideas: “it seems to me that giving an accurate account of one’s opponents’ views, however obnoxious one may consider them to be, is vital, and never more so than our in our age of cheap Twitter insults and casual slanders. There’s nothing to be gained from refuting a straw man.” Perhaps it’s the almost universal absence of this attitude in the public sphere that makes Trueman’s fairness seem startling. After listing thinkers and movements inimical to his own position, he says that he has tried to be “as careful and dispassionate as possible. Some readers might find this odd, given my personal dissent from much of what they each represent. But truthfulness is not optional. My hope is that I have represented the views of these groups and individuals in such a manner that, were they to read this book, they might demur to my conclusions but at least recognize themselves in my account of their thought.” [my emphasis]
Read More

When we experience a dire situation, we are tempted to wallow in shame and to despair and turn against others. We must remember and believe God’s promises and his Good News, but not just for ourselves. We must turn in faith and love and speak with hopeful confidence to those around us. This is precisely what we see in Adam’s naming of Eve.

Did you ever notice that Adam named Eve after the Fall? This small detail from the first few chapters of Genesis, given in a single verse, leads us to an inspiring truth in one of our closest relationships.
Initially, Adam called his wife simply “Woman” (Gen 2:23). But after their disobedience, he named her Eve, which means “life-giver” (Gen 3:20). She would be “the mother of all the living.” After she disobeyed God, Eve had every reason to believe she was anything but a life-giver. But this is the name Adam chose for her immediately after hearing the full impact of their sin and failure from their holy God.
This is an unexpected turn. Earlier, Adam had sidestepped his responsibility for disobeying God and resentfully blamed Eve, and ultimately God, for his failure. God then pronounced a sentence on each of them—to her, pain in childbearing—to him, relentless toil in his work. Their lives together would be marked by struggle. It was a somber and devastating moment.
But instead of nursing resentment and continuing to blame his wife, Adam’s immediate response and first act of loving leadership was to rename her “life-giver.” For though God had announced curses upon them, he also gave them a magnificent promise of redemption (Gen 3:15).
Read More