ST. JOHN LUTHERAN CHURCH
(The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod)
Alma, Kansas
A family united by faith in Christ gathering around God's Word and Sacraments.
To reach out in Christ-like concern and Christ-borne love to each other and to those without Christ!
In This Month's
St. John Witness
NOVEMBER WITNESS
Theology for the Day / Stephen Ministry
Stephen Ministry
What is Stephen Ministry? Congregations equip lay caregivers to provide high-quality, confidential, Christ-centered care to people who are hurting or are experiencing grief, divorce, cancer, job loss, loneliness, disability, relocation, and other life difficulties. Stephen Ministers serve in a one to one relationship of trust, care, and Christ-like concern. If you think you might benefit from having a Stephen Minister, please call Pastor Grimm, or talk with one of these servants of God. - Don Frank, Charlie Gann, Judy Peddicord, Junior Stuewe, Carol White.
If you would be interested in becoming a Stephen Minister, please contact Pastor Grimm.
Below is more information about the Stephen Series & Stephen MInistry.
- Why is it called the Stephen Series?
Stephen was one of the first laypeople commissioned by the Apostles to provide caring ministry (Acts 6). Series describes the steps a congregation follows to implement the caring ministry system, which is commonly called Stephen Ministry.
- How many congregations are using Stephen Ministry?
More than 11,000 congregations are enrolled, with hundreds more enrolling each year. They represent more than 150 denominations and come from all 50 United States, 10 Canadian provinces, and 24 other countries. Many congregations have had Stephen Ministry going strong for 20 or 30 years—or longer.
- What size congregations are involved?
Stephen Ministry congregations range from fewer than 100 members to more than 10,000. Churches of any size have opportunities to care for hurting people in the congregation and community.
- What are Stephen Ministers?
Stephen Ministers are laypeople who commit to two years of learning, growing, and caring. They receive Christian caregiving training in their congregation and then provide one-to-one Christ-centered care to hurting people. Each Stephen Minister typically has one care receiver at a time and meets with that person once a week.
- What types of caregiving situations are Stephen Ministers used in?
Stephen Ministers provide high-quality, one-to-one Christian care to individuals facing a variety of crises or life challenges—people who are experiencing grief, divorce, cancer, financial difficulties, hospitalization, chronic illness, job loss, disabilities, loneliness, a spiritual crisis, or other life struggles.
In addition to caring for members within the congregation, Stephen Ministers can provide care to nonmembers, reaching out to unchurched people in crisis.
- What are Stephen Leaders?
Stephen Leaders are pastors and lay leaders who direct Stephen Ministry in their congregation. They attend a one-week Leader’s Training Course (LTC) where they learn how to effectively lead their congregation’s Stephen Ministry.
- What is the meaning of the logo?
The Stephen Series logo symbolizes that we are all broken people and that we are only made whole through the cross of Jesus.
Since 1975 nearly a half million Christian men and women from all walks of life have trained and served as Stephen Ministers in their congregations. Most decide to become Stephen Ministers as a way to help hurting people in their congregation and community—but very quickly discover that God gives them amazing blessings in return.
- What do people say about Stephen Ministry?
“My faith has grown, my prayer life has doubled, and I know how to really make a difference in people’s lives. I’d encourage anyone who has the chance to become a Stephen Minister.”
George Lund, Architect Prairie Village, Kansas“Being a Stephen Minister has taught me to rely on God instead of always trying to fix things myself. I’ve learned what to say, how to listen, and what to do during a crisis. It’s a great feeling to provide people with the spiritual care and support they need.”
John Eichelberger, Physician Greenwood, South Carolina“The assertiveness skills I learned through Stephen Ministry gave me the courage and confidence I needed to be a more effective supervisor in my secular job—and to be more assertive in my personal relationships. Thank you for helping me develop these vital skills.”
Elizabeth McMillion, Rehabilitation Counselor Madison, Wisconsin
Theology for Today
These excerpts are reprinted from CTCR, March 2026. We will examine this in portions each month.
Proper Administration of the Lord’s Supper
Luther and the Confessions CTCR 2026
THE USE OF PRE-PACKAGED ELEMENTS
IN THE LORD'S SUPPER
Historical Background Of the three practices that are named in 2023 Res. 5-15, the most recent—at least in the LCMS—is the introduction of pre-packaged bread and wine (or grape juice). COVID-19 led to skyrocketing use of the packets in many Protestant and Evangelical churches,12 and also to some use in the LCMS. The recent rise of pre-packaged elements resulted from the mystery of how COVID-19 was spreading. The use of packets was linked to other changes in church life, from widespread temporary suspension of worship in many churches, to parking lot services, to physical separation of individuals and families in sanctuaries, and so forth. For one vendor of the pre-packaged elements, sales rose by 1,000 percent in the year after COVID-19 hit the US.13
Over the centuries, various ways of providing the communion elements have been employed in the church catholic. With regard to the bread, practice has varied through church history. The earliest evidence indicates that ordinary table bread was used. The Roman Catholic tradition now is to use only unleavened wheat bread; churches of the East generally use leavened bread. For many years a larger loaf was employed—sometimes leavened and sometimes not. Both unleavened and leavened bread have been used, usually made from wheat flour, although there is evidence that in some places other grains were acceptable to make the flour for the bread.
Usually the unleavened bread for the Sacrament is made with only flour and water, but in some places oil is added, and in others wine or salt may also be in the dough.14 The creation of the individual host dates to the seventh or eighth century, and by the ninth century the practice of individually made unleavened hosts was nearly uniform in the West (almost always baked in monasteries with prayer and fasting). However, a few, even in the West, preferred a single loaf of leavened bread for the Eucharist.15
With the Reformation came more change. The Reformed eventually insisted on the use of ordinary loaves in the Supper, because of the symbolism inherent therein, while Lutherans generally retained the Roman practice of individual hosts.16
The wine of the Supper through history also exhibits significant variety. Only grape wine appears to have been used throughout the church, although some heretical groups used only water rather than wine. While water alone was condemned, wine was typically diluted with water in the ancient world, in Jewish practice, and so also in the church. Augustine mentions the practice, and Cyprian of Carthage comments on this theologically, although the practice was more likely the result of practicality and custom than theology.17 The grape varieties used for wine varied.
The practice of communing in one kind, or withholding the cup, is of course one of the most significant variations that occurred in the practice of the Lord’s Supper. The practice of the New Testament church, as we know from Corinth, or of the Western Church in general into the twelfth century was clearly Communion in both kinds, although there were exceptions in isolated circumstances, for example, prior use of individual pre-packaged elements for the Lord’s Supper is even more recent, dating only to the closing years of the twentieth century.22 The initial “market” was among Evangelical churches and other Protestants whose practice of the Lord’s Supper involved having filled individual glasses (usually with grape juice) in a cup holder attached to the pew in front of the worshipers. Convenience was the initial rationale for the pre-packaged elements since the laborious process of filling each individual glass could be avoided.23 During the pandemic, many congregations, including some in the LCMS, adopted the use of pre-packaged elements as a way to have the Lord’s Supper without any perceived danger of virus transmission from either bread or cup. Plus, the packets simplified distribution for churches that met in parking lots and enabled it also for churches that held online or “virtual worship” by having members use pre-packaged elements that had been delivered to their homes.24
Polarization of opinions was an unfortunate result of the various responses to COVID-19. Some condemned those who refused government restrictions and counsel. Others condemned those who followed the guidelines. The use of communion packets was yet another source of disagreement. The debates and, too often, rancor affected churches and circuits. Hence, the LCMS convention request to consider the practice of using pre-packaged elements in 2023 Res. 5-15. But we note that the same convention also urged “charity and latitude” among Synod pastors regarding the various approaches taken in response to the pandemic.
We noted above that the accounts of the Last Supper in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, as well as Paul’s comments about the Sacrament in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11, certainly indicate something of how the Lord’s Supper was administered first by Jesus and then in the New Testament church. In both the Passover meal when Jesus first instituted His Supper and in Paul’s description of the Sacrament as he had received it, we hear of bread (artos) that is taken, blessed with thanksgiving,25 broken, and then distributed for eating with the assurance that it is Christ’s body. In like manner, a cup of wine is taken up to be blessed and declared to be His blood, and participants are invited to drink. With regard to right practice, then, the Synod holds firmly to the confessional understanding that the validity of the Lord’s Supper involves certain necessities: (1) right consecration—the use of the words of Jesus (Words of Institution) spoken over (2) the appropriate earthly elements of bread and wine, followed by (3) the distribution to the congregation for them to eat and drink (see, e.g., FC SD VII 79–82; FC SD VII 121; FC Ep VII 8–9; FC SD VII 75). Given the various ways that bread and cup have been given and received by Christians, as described above, one must proceed with caution before passing judgment on practice. For example, there has been widespread acceptance in most of Christianity of the use of bread that is provided in individual portions rather than from a single loaf. Similarly, even churches that do not utilize individual glasses for the Sacrament often employ several chalices when communing a very large assembly. Synod congregations have used both a single loaf and, more commonly, individual hosts, leavened and unleavened bread—all without condemnation or question. And many if not most congregations offer individual cups with explicit Synod approval. The LCMS has no resolutions or statements on the use of pre-packaged elements, and there is no incontrovertible scriptural basis for asserting that the use of individual packets of bread and wine would inherently invalidate the Sacrament.
This does not mean that any and every practice is acceptable regarding pre-packaged elements, especially since the Synod has addressed the manner of distributing the cup in the Lord’s Supper. We offer the following comments giving our considered opinion about their use: Consecration: As is always the case in the Lord’s Supper, the words of Christ must be spoken over the elements. To be sure, the words can be spoken over pre-packaged elements. However, the packets prevent a more explicit declaration. In a typical setting, the pastor can clearly indicate the bread and the cup (or cups) separately during the Words of Institution. He indicates the bread by touching or lifting it as he repeats our Lord’s words: “Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you. This do in remembrance of Me.” Then, he repeats Christ’s words as he indicates the cup: “Drink of it, all of you, this cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the forgiveness of sins. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
In our judgment, the consecration of packets lends itself to a confusion that is not evident in typical consecration. Also, the use of disposable plastic cups raises concerns about the proper and reverent treatment of the consecrated wine that remains after Communion.26 Elements: The LCMS affirms the biblical and confessional understanding that only bread and wine should be used in the Lord’s Supper.
Communion packets are available for purchase from a number of sources. Some provide only a portion of unleavened bread with grape juice. A few offer both packets with grape juice and with wine and some also offer gluten-free bread in their packets. Only packets that are filled with bread and wine are acceptable under any circumstances in LCMS congregations. Distribution: The manner of distribution varies. As is the case in general, some congregations have communicants come to the altar, kneel, and then receive Communion. Others have individuals walk forward and receive the Sacrament while standing, and then return to their seats (continuous Communion). In exceptional cases members are communed in their seat. Regarding prefilled packets, variety also existed. Three approaches were observed in LCMS congregations during the pandemic. In some churches, packets were handed to each individual communicant by the pastor or an elder assisting him. In others, individuals helped themselves, taking the packet from a tray or basket as they approached the altar to commune. A third form of distribution was having individuals take a communion packet together with a service folder (bulletin) as they entered the church and then, during the service of the Sacrament, communing in their seat. In general, the manner of reception is an adiaphoron. However, we strongly discourage the practice of having individuals take communion elements for themselves into the service and then communing in their seats This practice is problematic in two ways. First, it largely prevents any pastoral care regarding who is prepared for the Sacrament. Second, it raises confusion and doubt about the point of reference in the consecration when the pastor speaks of “this bread” and “drink this cup.” Should he say “That is My body” or “That cup is the new testament in My blood”?
Further, since “self-communing” in the pew is common in many Reformed churches and congregations, this may lead to confusion regarding crucial differences between Lutheran and Reformed theology and practice. Given these concerns, while the Commission does not consider the use of pre-packaged elements to be inherently illegitimate, we find it troubling. The use of pre-packaged elements invites confusion and can encourage bad practices. As noted above, such usage seems to invite some churches to adopt specific practices that undermine or prevent the practice of closed Communion and may also create questions about what has or has not been consecrated. Consequently, such a practice may under some circumstances create doubts that may cause communicants to be unsure that they are receiving Christ’s body and blood and therefore to refrain from reception. For these reasons, we believe the Synod should discourage their future use. This judgment does not in any way seek to condemn those pastors and congregations that, according to their best judgment during the confusion of the COVID-19 pandemic, made use of the packets. Nevertheless, we believe that the potential for confusion and bad practice outweighs any potential benefit. The great treasure that is Christ’s Holy Supper should not be discounted in place of uncertain attempts to avoid disease. Moreover, if we emphasize worries about the potential for disease transmission, public worship itself would be viewed as a possible threat to physical well-being because of the constant presence of influenza, continuing outbreaks of COVID-19, and other contagions. Our deepest concern as Christians is not threats to the body, but threats to our soul. Jesus rightly admonishes us about the danger of living in fear of this world’s threats and ignoring God (Matt. 10:28). A risk to the spiritual well-being of those who would be uncertain of the Sacrament should rank above the unlikelihood that Communion will endanger us physically.
Endnotes
12 Lutheranism can arguably be placed under the Protestant and the Evangelical umbrella as a church body that stems from the sixteenth-century Reformation. However, within this document our general practice will be to distinguish confessional Lutheranism from other Protestants and Evangelicalism.
13 Parija Kavilanz, “Easter Is Here, and So Are Disposable, Pre-filled Communion Cups,” CNN Business, April 7, 2020, https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/07/business/prefilled-communion-cups/index.html.
14 See Henri Leclercq, “Host,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 7 (Robert Appleton Company, 1910) https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07489d.htm
15 Lucia Graziano, “Communion Wafers Instead of Loaves: A History,” Aleteia, February 7, 2023, https:// aleteia.org/2023/02/07/communion-wafers-instead-of-loaves-a-history (accessed August 19, 2024).
16 “Host,” Catholic Encyclopedia.
17 Augustine, “On Christian Doctrine,” in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, ed. Philip Schaff (Hendrickson reprint, 1995), 590; Cyprian, “Epistle 62: Caecilius, on the Sacrament of the Cup of the Lord,” in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, ed. A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (Hendrickson reprint, 1995), 358–64.
16 Proper Administration of the Lord’s Supper when the Sacrament was taken to the sick and in the practice mentioned by certain church fathers of laity taking home the host for communing privately and in the communion of young children.
18 In the East the Sacrament “is always given in both forms—bread and wine.”
19 Thus, the Roman practice of communing in only one kind is a novelty in the catholic tradition that, unfortunately, became the standard in the medieval Roman Catholic Church. Protests against the practice of withholding the cup preceded the Reformation, but with the Reformers the chalice was returned to the laity in virtually every strand of the Reformation. As noted above, however, some Protestants began the variation of using something other than wine in the cup. Then, beginning in the twentieth century and due to advances in knowledge about disease transmission, the common chalice gradually gave way to the use of individual metal cups or glasses and then individual plastic cups. The cups were almost always filled in advance of the service. The rationale for the practice is the assumption that communicants are thereby protected from colds, flu, or other diseases. (It should be noted, however, that this assumption cannot be firmly substantiated and that there is no verifiable evidence of any transmission of infections via the common cup.)
20 Over time the use of individual portions of wine became common also in the LCMS, and the Synod formally approved the use of individual glasses in 1944.21 18 See Patrick Toner, “Communion under Both Kinds,” II. History of Disciplinary Variations, 2, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 4 (Robert Appleton Company, 1908), https://www.newadvent.org/ cathen/04175a.htm (accessed February 22, 2026).
19 “Holy Eucharist,” Orthodox Church in America, https://www.oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/ worship/the-sacraments/holy-eucharist (accessed August 22, 2024).
20 In 1998 the US Center for Disease Control “reported that there had never been an outbreak of infection related to the communion cup and that a theoretical risk of transmitting infectious diseases by using a common communion cup exists, but that the risk is so small that it is undetectable.” See “COVID-19 and Holy Communion” Public Health 187 (2020): 134–35, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.puhe.2020.08.012. A later study published in light of COVID-19 came to this same conclusion that “the common communion cup may serve as a potential vehicle for transmission. However, the risk is considerably lower compared to other conditions of social gathering. Furthermore, the transmission of any infectious disease has never been documented” (emphasis added); see Dimitrios Anyfantakis, “Holy Communion and Infection Transmission: A Literature Review,” Cureus Journal of Medical Science, June 21, 2020, https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.8741
.
21 The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1944 Convention Proceedings, 254–55. 17
22 According to the Chicago Tribune, prepackaged elements were first marketed in 1996. See “Communion in a Cup Has Its Converts, Naysayers,” April 19, 1996, updated August 18, 2021, https://www .chicagotribune.com/1996/04/19/ communion-in-a-cup-has-its-converts-naysayers/.
23 Although popular, the communion package also had detractors even within Evangelicalism. “Communion in a Cup” notes that critics argued that the practice undermined the symbolism of the Lord’s Supper.
24 The LCMS has, of course, strongly opposed virtual or online Communion. See 2023 Convention Proceedings, Res. 5-08A, 152–53. The third “Resolved” reads: “That the Synod in convention clearly and unequivocally reject and condemn the practice of virtual (online) Communion.” See Appendix C for the full text of the resolution. See also the various CTCR opinions on this issue, available online at http://resources.lcms.org/reading-study/ctcr-library-means-of-grace-sacraments-lutheran-doctrine -and-practice/
.
25 Matthew and Mark speak of Jesus “blessing” the bread (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22), while Luke and Paul describe Him giving “thanks” (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24).
26 In Theology and Practice of the Lord’s Supper, page 17, the CTCR states: “The consecrated elements which remain after all have communed should be treated with reverence. This reverence has been expressed by Lutherans in various ways. Some have followed the ancient practice of burning the bread and pouring the wine upon the earth. Others have established a basin and drain—piscina—specifically for the disposal of the wine. The elders or altar guild may also return the consecrated bread and wine to specific containers for future sacramental use, or the elders and pastor can consume the remaining elements. All of these practices should be understood properly. The church is not, thereby, conferring upon the elements some abiding status apart from their use in the Lord’s Supper itself.” See also the reference to FC SD VII 14–15 on page 17.
CTCR-Proper Administration of the Lord’s Supper
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
https://files.lcms.org/file/preview/ctcr-report-proper-administration
