The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Paedo-communion

John asks,

I realized that I may not know exactly what all paeodo-communion entails. I guess I've never been in a church that practiced it, so when I heard the word I always thought of much younger children than what seems to be the case in the Sproul document. For example, when one says paedo-baptism, I usually think of infants, or at least very very young children.

Furthermore, they object that there is no more reason to administer baptism to infants than the Lord’s supper, which is not permitted to them. As if Scripture did not mark a wide difference in every respect! This permission was indeed commonly given in the ancient church, as is clear from Cyprian and Augustine, but the custom has deservedly fallen into disuse. For if we consider the peculiar character of baptism, surely it is an entrance and a sort of initiation into the church, through which we are numbered among God’s people: a sign of our spiritual regeneration, through which we are reborn as children of God. On the other hand, the Supper is given to older persons who, having passed tender infancy, can now take solid food.

This distinction is very clearly shown in Scripture. For with respect to baptism, the Lord there sets no definite age. But he does not similarly hold forth the Supper for all to partake of, but only for those who are capable of discerning the body and blood of the Lord, of examining their own conscience, of proclaiming the Lord’s death, and of considering its power. Do we wish anything plainer than the apostle’s teaching when he exhorts each man to prove and search himself, then to eat of this bread and drink of this cup [1Cor. 11:28]? Self-examination ought, therefore, to come first, and it is vain to expect this of infants. Again: “He who eats unworthily eats and drinks condemnation for himself, not discerning the body of the Lord” [1 Cor. 11:29]. If only those who know how to distinguish rightly the holiness of Christ’s body are able to participate worthily, why should we offer poison instead of life-giving food to our tender children? What is that command of the Lord: “Do this in remembrance of me” [Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:25]? What is that other command which the apostle derives from it: “As often as you eat this bread, you will proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” [1 Cor. 11:26]? What remembrance of this thing, I ask, shall we require of infants when they have never grasped it? What preaching of the cross of Christ, the force and benefit of which their minds have not yet comprehended? None of these things is prescribed in baptism. Accordingly, there is a very great difference between these two signs, as we have noted in like sign also under the Old Testament. Circumcision, which is known to correspond to our baptism, had been appointed for infants [Gen. 17:12]. But the Passover, the place of which has been taken by the Supper, did not admit all guests indiscriminately, but was duly eaten only by those who were old enough to be able to inquire into its meaning [Ex. 12:26]. If these men had a particle of sound brain left, would they be blind to a thing so clear and obvious?

Institutes of the Christian Religion, (2:1353; 4:16:30).

Jewish sources reveal no unanimity with respect to the exact age when a boy became a ‘bar mitzvah’ (son of the law), that is, when he attained the age of maturity and responsibility with respect to the keeping of God’s commandments. The prevailing opinion may have been that at the age of 13 a boy should fully shoulder that responsibility but that in order to become prepared to do this it would be wise for the parents to take him along to the temple even earlier. We know at least that when Jesus became 12 years of age Joseph and Mary took him along to Jerusalem in order to attend the Passover festival. Though it is not stated in so many words that this was the first time he went along, is not this a reasonable inference?

The Gospel of Luke, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978).

John asks,

How does one decide at what age a child's profession of faith is genuine or not? Do churches that don't practice paedo-communion have an age limit in their books of order or is it taken on a case-by-case basis?

J_Edwards said:

As we have already seen from Calvin, age is not really the issue. 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 is essential for determining the truth in the matter. Paul presents a principle that Christians must examine themselves before taking the Lord's supper (v. 28). Christ's body and blood are present in the sacramental meal (v. 24, i.e. spiritually), and so those who partake of the Supper in an unworthy manner partake of Christ—that is His judgment (v. 27)— temporal judgment, or even death (v. 30). Participants in the Supper must judge themselves in order to avoid discipline (v. 31).