.png)
Why HCC Does Not Believe in Paedo-Communion: Upholding Reformed Confessional Standards of Profession, Maturity, and Self-Examination
- Jeremy Lyerla
- Jan 25
- 27 min read
Updated: May 13
Introduction
At Heritage Covenant Church (HCC), we are committed to upholding the biblical and historic Reformed understanding of the Lord’s Supper. As a covenantal meal, the Supper is reserved for those who can engage in meaningful self-examination, discerning the body and blood of Christ with understanding and faith. Scripture, particularly in 1 Corinthians 11:28-29, calls believers to “examine themselves” before partaking, emphasizing the need for spiritual maturity and conscious reflection. This requirement aligns with the consistent teaching of the church throughout history—from the early church fathers to the Reformers and beyond—who affirmed that participation in the Supper necessitates a credible profession of faith and an awareness of one’s sin and need for Christ. At HCC, we embrace this position as a safeguard to the integrity of the sacrament, ensuring that it serves its intended purpose of strengthening the believer and glorifying God.
The Biblical Foundation: A Call for Discernment and Self-Examination
The primary biblical argument against paedo-communion is found in 1 Corinthians 11:28-29, where the Apostle Paul exhorts believers to "examine themselves" before partaking of the Lord's Supper. This requirement for self-examination implies a cognitive and spiritual maturity that infants and young children do not possess.
Scriptural Support:
1 Corinthians 11:27-29 – Paul warns against partaking "in an unworthy manner," which necessitates an understanding of the sacrament’s significance.
Matthew 26:26-29 – Christ's institution of the Supper includes clear teaching elements that imply the need for comprehension.
The call for self-examination in 1 Corinthians 11:28 is rooted in the broader biblical principle of discerning the Lord’s body. Paul stresses the seriousness of approaching the
Lord’s Table without proper reflection, stating, "For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1 Corinthians 11:29). This requirement presupposes a level of self-awareness and doctrinal understanding that children, by virtue of their developmental stage, do not yet possess.
Moreover, the Greek term used for
"examine" (δοκιμάζω, dokimazō) implies
rigorous testing or evaluation, indicating that the participant must be capable of assessing their spiritual condition, understanding their relationship to Christ, and appreciating the gravity of the sacrament.
Theological Implications of Self-Examination:
The call for discernment and examination carries several theological implications:
Maturity and Repentance: The Lord's Supper is not merely a communal meal but a sacramental participation in Christ's work. Those who partake must be capable of personal repentance and faith in Christ's atoning sacrifice.
Understanding of Sin and Grace: Examining oneself requires an awareness of sin and the assurance of salvation, aspects of faith that necessitate cognitive and spiritual maturity.
Accountability within the Church: Admission to the Table involves a public profession of faith, which allows the church to ensure the communicant is living in accordance with God's Word.
Cornelis P. Venema, in Children at the Lord's Table?, emphasizes the biblical requirement of self-examination and spiritual maturity, arguing that paedo-communion undermines the covenantal development of faith. Venema states, "The Supper is not a meal for mere physical nourishment but for those who can discern the Lord’s body."
The Witness of the Early and Medieval Church Fathers
The early and medieval church fathers consistently upheld the necessity of faith and discernment for participation in the Lord's Supper. While infants were baptized, the Lord’s Supper was reserved for those who had received instruction in the faith and could demonstrate an understanding of its meaning and significance.
Key Figures and Their Teachings:
Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) – Augustine emphasized that participation in the Eucharist required faith and understanding, stating,
"Faith must precede the sacrament; if it does not, then what is received is condemnation, not grace."
He argued that the sacraments must be accompanied by true faith, which includes knowledge of sin and the need for grace. Augustine’s emphasis on faith preceding the sacrament highlights his conviction that only those with a conscious awareness of their spiritual state should approach the Lord’s Table.
Cyril of Jerusalem (313-386 AD) – Cyril required catechetical instruction before admission to the Eucharist, ensuring that recipients understood the gravity and significance of the sacrament. He wrote,
"Before approaching the holy mysteries, let the catechumens be taught, that they may approach in faith and reverence."
His catechetical lectures were designed to thoroughly prepare converts for full participation in the sacramental life of the church, reinforcing the necessity of understanding.
John Chrysostom (349-407 AD) – Chrysostom stressed the importance of self-examination and spiritual maturity, stating,
"Let a man examine himself and thus eat. The table is for those who know their Lord, not for babes in understanding."
He viewed the Eucharist as a profound mystery that required not only faith but also spiritual discernment and moral readiness.
Tertullian (155-240 AD) – Tertullian opposed giving the Eucharist to infants, arguing that participation required conscious faith and an ability to respond to the significance of the sacrament. He wrote, "The Eucharist is to be received with understanding, not as mere routine but with a heart prepared and examined." He believed that infants, lacking the ability to understand the significance of communion, should wait until they are mature enough to make a conscious decision. He stated,
"Why should innocent age hasten to the remission of sins? ... Let them know how to ask for salvation, that you may seem (at least) to have given 'to him that asketh.'"
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 AD) – Aquinas distinguished between baptism, which regenerates, and the Eucharist, which nourishes. He asserted that only those capable of rational discernment should partake in the Eucharist, reinforcing the necessity of understanding the body and blood of Christ in a meaningful way.
"The use of the Eucharist requires devotion and intention, in the recipient; without which, the sacrament is received unworthily."
These early and medieval church fathers provide a consistent testimony that the Lord's Supper was reserved for those capable of faith, repentance, and self-examination, aligning with the Reformed position today.
The Reformers' Opposition to Paedo-Communion
Reformers such as John Calvin and Martin Bucer strongly opposed paedo-communion, viewing it as inconsistent with the doctrine of the sacraments. Calvin, in Institutes of the Christian Religion (Book 4, Chapter 17), emphasized that the Lord's Supper is for those who can examine themselves and repent. He writes, "This is the spiritual food, which can only be received by those who have a true understanding of Christ and his benefits." In his commentary on 1 Corinthians 11, Calvin stresses that “those who eat unworthily bring judgment upon themselves,” reinforcing his position that children, lacking the requisite capacity for self-examination, should not partake.
Calvin’s pastoral letters further highlight his opposition to paedo-communion. In one letter, he states, "It is the duty of pastors to carefully guard the Lord’s Table, ensuring that only those who are able to discern the body of Christ partake." Martin Bucer also insisted that the Lord's Supper follow a credible profession of faith, stating that “the Supper is a meal for those who can articulate their faith and demonstrate a life in accordance with the gospel.”
Calvin concluded;
“He who eats unworthily eats and drinks condemnation for himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 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?”
These positions from the Reformers align with the broader Reformed tradition, which sees the Lord’s Supper as a means of grace for those who have come to a mature understanding of their sin and their need for Christ. Their writings reinforce the necessity of proper instruction, public confession, and the church’s responsibility to fence the table from those who are unprepared to partake worthily.
The Second Reformation and Dutch Reformed Perspective
Following the Reformation, Dutch theologians of the Second Reformation, such as Wilhelmus à Brakel, Herman Witsius, and Petrus van Mastricht, reinforced the importance of spiritual maturity and understanding before approaching the Lord’s Table.
Key Second Reformation Figures:
Wilhelmus à Brakel – In his work The Christian's Reasonable Service, à Brakel delineates the Lord's Supper as a means of confirming faith, not initiating it. He asserts, "The Supper is for those who have a spiritual hunger and thirst, not for those who have yet to be taught the basics of the faith," excluding infants who cannot express a credible profession of faith. He further explains that the sacrament serves to strengthen the faith of those who have already come to a conscious understanding of their sin and need for Christ. À Brakel argues that "without knowledge of sin and an earnest desire for Christ, the Supper becomes an empty ritual rather than a source of nourishment for the soul." He emphasizes the pastoral responsibility to ensure that those who partake do so with a sincere heart, understanding that the Lord's Supper is a covenantal meal requiring an examined and contrite heart.
Herman Witsius – In The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man, Witsius emphasizes that participants in the Lord's Supper must exhibit evidence of faith and repentance. He underscores the pastoral responsibility to ensure that communicants approach the table with a heart prepared for self-examination and gratitude to Christ. Witsius taught that the Supper is designed for those who can understand their covenant obligations and respond in faith and obedience, warning that admitting those who lack such discernment risks undermining the integrity of the sacrament.
Petrus van Mastricht – In Theoretical-Practical Theology, van Mastricht discusses the efficacy of baptism, particularly concerning infants. He argues that while baptism serves as an initiatory sign into the covenant of grace, the Lord's Supper requires a distinct level of spiritual maturity and understanding. He stresses the necessity of catechesis and spiritual readiness, warning against admitting individuals who cannot examine themselves.
Van Mastricht further cautions that allowing children to partake without proper instruction diminishes the solemnity and purpose of the ordinance, stating, "To eat without discernment is to eat to one's condemnation, and thus it is a duty of the church to fence the table from those who lack understanding."
These theologians collectively affirm that the Lord's Supper is not a converting ordinance but a confirming one, appropriate only for those who have made a credible profession of faith. Their writings reinforce the principle that self-examination and discernment are essential prerequisites for worthy participation in the sacrament, aligning with the broader Reformed tradition's stance against paedo-communion.
The Puritans' Rejection of Paedocommunion
The Puritans firmly opposed the practice of paedocommunion—the admission of infants and young children to the Lord’s Supper—on the grounds that the sacrament requires an active, conscious, and examined faith that infants are incapable of exercising. They viewed the Supper not as a means to initiate faith, but as a means to nourish an already mature, professing faith. For the Puritans, participation in the Supper necessitated personal examination, discernment, and an understanding of Christ’s sacrifice—requirements that exclude infants and young children.
Biblical and Theological Arguments Against Paedocommunion
Puritans often referenced 1 Corinthians 11:28-29:"Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body."They argued that this command for self-examination and discernment presupposes a level of spiritual maturity that children simply do not possess. John Owen articulated this view, stating:
"The Lord's Supper is not for infants, because it requires an understanding to discern the Lord's body, a grace to examine one's self, and a faith to receive Christ aright. These are things not found in children, and to admit them without such qualities is to profane the ordinance." (Works of John Owen, Vol. 16)
Similarly, Thomas Watson stressed the necessity of self-examination before partaking in the sacrament:
"The duty of self-examination is indispensable, for Christ’s Table is for those who can discern the nature of the covenant and their own standing in it. Without knowledge and repentance, one makes a mockery of the feast." (The Lord's Supper)
This insistence on knowledge, repentance, and conscious faith directly opposes the notion of admitting infants who cannot perform these duties.
The Covenant Distinction
The Puritans affirmed the distinction between baptism and the Lord’s Supper within the covenant of grace. Baptism, they argued, was a sign of initiation into the covenant community, administered based on the faith of the parents, whereas the Lord’s Supper required a personal and credible profession of faith. Richard Baxter wrote:
"Baptism doth admit to the visible church in its external privileges, but the Supper is a peculiar confirmation of the covenant to such as can profess it with understanding." (A Christian Directory)
This distinction upheld the covenantal continuity of infant baptism while reinforcing the necessity of personal faith for participation in the Lord’s Supper.
Practical and Pastoral Concerns
In their pastoral practice, Puritan ministers often required individuals to provide a credible testimony of their conversion before being admitted to the Table. They viewed early participation without proper spiritual understanding as potentially harmful, both to the individual and to the church. William Perkins cautioned against the dangers of unworthy participation:
"If the table of the Lord is to be fenced, it is to keep away those who are unable to discern the Lord’s body, lest they bring upon themselves spiritual harm rather than benefit." (A Treatise on the Sacraments)
This careful approach ensured that only those who demonstrated evidence of saving faith were allowed to partake, thereby protecting the sanctity of the ordinance.
Critique of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Views
The Puritans also rejected the paedocommunion practices observed in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions, which allowed young children to receive the sacrament. They saw these practices as rooted in a misunderstanding of the nature of the Supper and the broader Reformed doctrine of the covenant. Samuel Rutherford critiqued such practices, stating:
"To put the bread of the covenant into the mouths of infants, who cannot yet understand the terms of the covenant, is to act contrary to Christ's institution and make void the necessity of personal faith." (The Covenant of Life Opened)
Rutherford’s position reflects the broader Puritan belief that proper participation in the Supper required an informed and intentional response to the gospel.
The Puritans rejected paedocommunion based on their firm commitment to the biblical requirement of self-examination, their distinction between the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and their pastoral concern for the purity of the church. They maintained that while infants are rightful recipients of baptism, the Lord’s Supper is reserved for those who can consciously affirm their faith and obedience to Christ. Their writings consistently emphasized that admission to the Table must follow a credible profession of faith, making paedocommunion incompatible with their understanding of the sacrament.
The Church Order's Safeguard Against Paedo-Communion
In a study on Paedo-Communion, it is underscored the importance of Article 61 of the Church Order as a safeguard against the unbiblical practice of admitting young children to the Lord's Supper. Article 61 establishes clear and necessary criteria for admittance to the sacrament, ensuring that proper doctrinal understanding, spiritual maturity, and ecclesiastical accountability are maintained. The three key requirements articulated in this article are as follows:
Confession of Faith Individuals seeking to partake in the Lord's Supper must publicly confess the Reformed faith. This confession serves as an affirmation of their personal belief in the doctrines outlined in the Three Forms of Unity or the Westminster Standards, demonstrating their conscious and informed acceptance of the gospel and their understanding of the sacrament's significance.
Godly Life Admittance to the Lord's Table requires visible evidence of a godly life and conduct. This criterion emphasizes the necessity of spiritual maturity and a life marked by repentance, faith, and obedience. The requirement safeguards the sacrament from profanation and ensures that participants are living in accordance with biblical principles.
Church Membership Participation in the Lord's Supper is reserved for those who are members of a Reformed church federation. Church membership provides ecclesiastical oversight and accountability, affirming that the communicant is under the pastoral care and discipline of the church, which is vital for maintaining the purity of the sacrament.
Idzerd Van Dellen and Martin Monsma, in The Church Order Commentary, provide practical guidelines for guarding the Lord's Table against unbiblical practices such as Paedo-Communion. They emphasize the necessity of upholding Article 61 as a vital protection against doctrinal errors and improper participation. Their commentary highlights the pastoral responsibility to ensure that only those who meet the established criteria are admitted to the sacrament, reinforcing the Reformed church's commitment to maintaining the integrity of the means of grace.
By adhering to these safeguards, the church preserves the biblical pattern of responsible communion participation, ensuring that the Lord's Supper remains a means of grace for those who can discern the body and blood of Christ rightly. This commitment to doctrinal faithfulness and ecclesiastical order reflects the Reformed conviction that the sacraments must be administered in accordance with God's Word for the edification of the church and the glory of Christ.
The Confessional Denial of Paedocommunion
The practice of paedocommunion— was carefully examined and consistently denied within the confessional standards. Foundational documents such as the Westminster Standards, the Belgic Confession, and the Heidelberg Catechism affirm that the Lord's Supper is reserved for professing believers who can examine themselves and grasp the spiritual significance of the sacrament.
The Westminster Standards
The Westminster Larger Catechism makes a clear distinction between baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Baptism, as a sign and seal of entrance into the covenant community, is rightly administered to infants. However, the Lord’s Supper is to be received only by those who have reached "years and ability to examine themselves" (Q&A 177). This self-examination requires personal faith, repentance, and discernment—qualities infants lack. The Westminster Confession of Faith 29.8 reinforces this, stating that "ignorant and ungodly persons" are unfit to partake, underscoring the need for a conscious and active faith.
Joseph Morecraft, in his exposition of the Westminster Larger Catechism, argues against paedocommunion by emphasizing the clear biblical and confessional distinction between baptism and the Lord’s Supper. While baptism is a sign of covenant inclusion, given even to infants, the Lord’s Supper, according to the Catechism, is reserved for those “of years and ability to examine themselves” (Q. 177), citing 1 Corinthians 11:28. Morecraft asserts, “Just as the physical activity in eating the bread and wine are beyond the capacity of infants, so the spiritual activity required in the taking of the Lord’s Supper is beyond the ability of infants.” He explains that the Old Testament Passover, often cited by paedocommunionists, required not only circumcision but also spiritual maturity, catechetical instruction, and self-examination—requirements that carry over to the New Testament observance of the Lord’s Supper. Paedocommunion, he argues, fails to recognize the covenantal distinction between initiation and renewal, misunderstanding the sacrament’s demand for conscious faith and discernment
The Heidelberg Catechism
The Heidelberg Catechism is equally clear in its teaching regarding worthy participation in the Lord's Supper. In Q&A 81, it asks: "Who should come to the Lord’s Table?"
The answer provided excludes infants by stating that the Supper is for those who are "truly displeased with their sins, yet trust that they are forgiven them for the sake of Christ," and who sincerely desire to strengthen their faith and amend their lives. These qualifications necessitate spiritual maturity and self-awareness—prerequisites infants and young children cannot meet.
Ursinus’ Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism
Zacharias Ursinus, the principal author of the Heidelberg Catechism, expands on these ideas in his commentary, providing further clarity and depth to the catechism’s position. Ursinus argues that participation in the Supper requires an individual’s conscious reflection on their spiritual condition. He emphasizes three key aspects:
Self-examination: Ursinus teaches that before partaking, a person must "examine whether they truly repent of their sins, whether they believe that they are forgiven for the sake of Christ, and whether they have a sincere purpose to amend their lives." This process demands an intellectual and spiritual maturity that infants simply do not possess.
Faith and Discernment: He further explains that communicants must "discern the Lord's body," meaning they must understand Christ's sacrifice and approach the table with a believing heart. Ursinus underscores the catechism’s position that the Supper is not for those incapable of such discernment.
Personal Responsibility: According to Ursinus, the Lord's Supper signifies not only receiving Christ by faith but also a commitment to obedience and sanctification. He writes that the sacrament is intended for those who can reflect upon their lives and respond in obedience, a task beyond the cognitive and spiritual capacity of infants.
Ursinus' commentary, therefore, serves to reinforce and expand the catechism’s emphasis on self-examination and understanding, further establishing the case against paedocommunion.
The Belgic Confession
The Belgic Confession (Article 35) similarly affirms that the sacraments are for those who can receive them in faith and self-examination. It states that the Lord’s Supper is given to those who “with a believing heart” partake of Christ’s body and blood. This statement implies that the participant must have a personal, conscious faith—again, something that infants are incapable of expressing.
The collective testimony of the Westminster Standards, Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession, and Ursinus’ commentary consistently denies paedocommunion. These confessional documents affirm that the Lord’s Supper is a sacrament for those who can actively examine themselves, confess their sins, and discern the body of Christ.
By requiring a credible profession of faith, repentance, and self-examination, the Reformed tradition preserves the integrity of the sacrament and ensures that it is administered according to the biblical principle found in 1 Corinthians 11:28.
Therefore, based on these confessional teachings, paedocommunion is not a biblically or confessionally valid practice, and the Reformed churches rightly uphold the view that participation in the Lord’s Supper is reserved for those who have attained a level of spiritual maturity necessary to partake worthily.
Kyle Borg concludes-
"Reformed theology, especially as it’s expressed in its confessional statements, stands against the practice of paedocommunion — insisting that worthy participation requires faith, confession, and examination."
Modern Reformed Theologians' Insights
Modern Reformed theologians continue to oppose paedo-communion, emphasizing the necessity of spiritual maturity, self-examination, and an understanding of the sacrament.
Key Figures:
R.C. Sproul – Sproul consistently maintained that paedo-communion confuses the distinct purposes of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. He argued that while baptism serves as an initiatory sign into the covenant community, the Lord's Supper requires an active participation of faith and repentance. In his teaching series and writings, Sproul stated, “The Lord’s Table is for those who can discern the body and blood of Christ, reflecting upon their sin and their need for grace.” He warned that administering the sacrament to children risks undermining the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith. Sproul emphasized that self-examination is a biblical mandate and a necessary element of participation, highlighting the responsibility of parents and church leaders to instruct children before they partake.
Joel Beeke – Beeke, in his works and sermons, underscores the importance of conscious faith and personal examination before partaking in the Lord’s Supper. He argues that participation in the sacrament requires an experiential knowledge of one’s sinfulness and need for Christ. Beeke writes,
“To come rightly to the Lord’s Table, one must know themselves to be a sinner in need of Christ’s grace. Without self-examination, participation is empty and dangerous.”
He insists that children lack the capacity to discern their spiritual condition and the gravity of Christ’s sacrifice. Beeke further elaborates that the Lord’s Supper is meant to be a strengthening means of grace for those who have already been regenerated and can consciously reflect on their covenant responsibilities. His emphasis on catechesis and preparation aligns with the historic Reformed stance that the sacrament should not be administered to those who cannot examine themselves.
Dr. Joseph Pipa - firmly opposes paedocommunion, arguing that participation in the Lord’s Supper requires an active exercise of faith, self-examination, and an articulate profession—criteria that young children cannot fulfill. He emphasizes the biblical mandate from 1 Corinthians 11, stating, “Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup,” underscoring that proper participation necessitates discernment and personal reflection to avoid partaking unworthily. The Westminster Standards uphold this requirement, with Larger Catechism 171 teaching that communicants must examine their faith, repentance, love for God, and obedience, distinguishing the Lord’s Supper from baptism, which Pipa describes as a passive sacrament signifying entry into the covenant community.
A major concern with paedocommunion is sacramental confusion, where the distinct roles of baptism and communion become blurred. Baptism marks the beginning of the Christian life, while the Supper requires ongoing, conscious faith and the ability to discern Christ's body (1 Cor. 11:29). Allowing children to partake without understanding, Pipa argues, risks reducing the Supper to
“a truncated sacramentarian view that leads to Romanism.”
He also emphasizes the necessity of covenantal affirmation, citing Psalm 50:5, “Gather my godly ones to me, those who have made a covenant with me by sacrifice,” to highlight that children are heirs of the promises but must personally embrace them by taking vows and assuming responsibility within the church. Additionally, he refutes the argument from Old Testament feasts, noting that while children may have been present, participation required understanding, as seen in Nehemiah 8:3, which states that those present were “men and women, and all who could understand.” Pipa stresses that participation in the Lord's Supper requires conscious engagement and warns that introducing paedocommunion undermines biblical teaching and the doctrinal integrity of the church.
These theologians reinforce the necessity of maintaining the historic Reformed practice and caution against the potential for false assurance that paedo-communion might bring.
Joel Beeke, R.C. Sproul, and Pipa all provide strong arguments against paedo-communion, emphasizing the necessity of spiritual maturity, self-examination, and an understanding of the sacrament.
Theological and Pastoral Concerns
When evaluating the practice of paedo-communion—the inclusion of infants and young children in the Lord's Supper—both theological and pastoral considerations present significant objections. These concerns are not merely theoretical but have profound implications for the spiritual health and discipleship of the church.
Sacramental Confusion
A primary concern with paedo-communion is the potential for sacramental confusion, where the distinct purposes of baptism and the Lord's Supper become obscured. Baptism serves as the entry into the covenant community, marking an individual's inclusion in the visible church, while the Lord's Supper is a means of ongoing grace for those who can actively discern the body of Christ (1 Cor. 11:29). Administering the Supper to those unable to examine themselves weakens the distinction between initiation and nourishment. The Reformed tradition has long maintained that baptism signifies the beginning of the Christian life, whereas communion requires an ongoing, conscious faith. Blurring these roles risks diminishing the richness and clarity of each sacrament’s function within the covenant community.
Lack of Discipleship
Delaying participation in the Lord’s Supper until a child reaches spiritual maturity provides the necessary opportunity for catechetical instruction and discipleship. Scripture establishes a pattern of teaching and preparation before participation in covenant meals, ensuring that individuals partake with understanding and reverence (1 Cor. 11:27-29). The historic Reformed churches have upheld the practice of catechizing children, equipping them with a firm foundation of doctrinal knowledge and personal faith before they are welcomed to the Table.
Paedo-communion, however, circumvents this critical phase of spiritual development, potentially resulting in a shallow understanding of the faith. The Lord’s Supper should be a confirmation of a believer's commitment, reinforcing the fruits of faithful instruction rather than preceding it.
False Assurance
A significant pastoral concern is the potential for false assurance that may result from admitting children to the Supper prematurely. The act of partaking in the elements, if not accompanied by a genuine profession of faith and understanding, can lead to a misplaced confidence in one’s standing before God. Without the capacity to examine themselves and discern the body of Christ, young children may develop an assumption of salvation based on external participation rather than an internal work of grace. This premature inclusion runs the risk of encouraging a ritualistic approach to faith rather than a personal, conscious dependence on Christ and His redemptive work.
Covenantal Considerations and Profession of Faith
A key component of the covenantal framework is the necessity for children to affirm the covenant promises made on their behalf personally. Psalm 50:5 states, “Gather my godly ones to me, those who have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.” While children are included within the covenant community, the historic Reformed position emphasizes that they must take personal vows and assume responsibility within the church before participating in the Lord’s Table. Dr. J. Pipa uses the analogy that children in the USA are citizens of the country but are not able to vote or have full rights or responsibilities of citizenship. Similarly, children within the covenant community are considered part of God's people, yet they must reach a point of maturity where they can profess their faith and take on the responsibilities that come with it. This progression from covenant inclusion to conscious profession highlights the importance of self-examination and a personal commitment to Christ.
Argument from Silence in the Old Testament Feasts
Advocates of paedocommunion often cite the inclusion of children in Old Testament feasts such as Passover. However, Scripture does not explicitly state that children partook in the meal, and understanding was a prerequisite for participation (Nehemiah 8:3). The distinction between observing and actively participating in these feasts underscores the biblical principle that comprehension and discernment are essential for full participation in sacred meals.
Connection to Federal Vision Theology
Paedo-communion has been associated with Federal Vision theology, which teaches that baptism unites individuals with Christ and conveys salvific benefits. This perspective introduces a sacramentalism that conflicts with Reformed theology, which upholds the necessity of a personal, conscious faith in Christ. The Reformed tradition affirms that while baptism signifies entry into the covenant community, the Lord's Supper requires ongoing faith and self-examination to partake rightly.
A Father’s Perspective: Readiness for Communion and the Growth of a Child’s Faith
As a father of eight and a grandfather of two, I’ve had the privilege of witnessing the different stages of a child’s development—spiritually, emotionally, and intellectually. One thing becomes evident through years of parenting: young children, by their very nature, seek to please their parents. They often embrace the faith of their family with sincerity but with limited understanding of the weight of sin and what is truly at stake in their relationship with Christ. This observation raises an important point when it comes to the readiness of children for the Lord’s Table.
Many argue that if a child expresses belief in Christ, they should immediately be welcomed to the sacrament of communion. However, any parent who has experienced a child’s growth in faith knows that early professions, though sincere, often lack the depth of conviction and self-awareness that comes with maturity. It’s not uncommon for a child to make a heartfelt confession of faith, only to later realize they did not fully grasp the gravity of their sin or the richness of God’s grace. Countless testimonies exist of individuals who, though they confessed Christ as young children, came to a deeper and more personal understanding of their need for a Savior in later years.
This reality underscores the value of affirming a child’s covenant status without prematurely admitting them to the Table. As parents, our role is not simply to acknowledge a momentary confession but to nurture their faith through consistent catechization, discipleship, and a gradual unfolding of gospel truths. Partnering with the church and Christian education provides a well-rounded support system, guiding children towards a mature confession of faith—one that demonstrates not only a desire to belong but a deep understanding of repentance, faith, and the solemn nature of communion.
The Developmental Stages and Communion Readiness
Understanding a child’s developmental stages helps us recognize that delaying communion is not exclusion but loving protection, as their cognitive, emotional, and spiritual capacities mature over time. In infancy to early childhood (0-5 years), children imitate behaviors and seek to please authority figures, often focusing on external approval rather than a true grasp of sin and grace, making participation at this stage a risk for empty ritualism without self-examination (1 Corinthians 11:28). During early to middle childhood (6-11 years), they begin to understand moral concepts but still view faith externally and in simple terms, meaning their articulation of belief often lacks a mature understanding of sin and Christ’s redemptive work, leading to a superficial participation. In early adolescence (12-14 years), abstract thinking develops, allowing for deeper reflection on personal faith and sin, yet they may still require time to consistently practice self-examination and grasp the sacrament’s full significance. Finally, in middle to late adolescence (15-18 years), teens are capable of true spiritual reflection, understanding sin and grace with greater maturity, and are more prepared to make a public profession of faith and partake in communion with accountability. By patiently nurturing their faith and allowing them to grow into a full understanding of communion, we ensure they approach the Lord’s Table with the reverence and discernment Scripture requires.
The Danger of Premature Participation
One of the greatest concerns in admitting children to the Lord’s Table too soon is the risk of partaking in an unworthy manner. Scripture is clear in 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 that those who eat and drink without proper self-examination risk bringing judgment upon themselves. If we push our children into communion before they are spiritually prepared, we may inadvertently usher them into a place of condemnation rather than blessing.
Just as a responsible parent wouldn’t give a child the keys to a car before they are ready, we must not place the weight of the Lord’s Supper upon them before they have the maturity to handle it rightly. Our duty is to protect our children from spiritual harm, allowing them to take on responsibilities appropriate to their level of understanding and accountability. This patient approach ensures they come to the Table with reverence, gratitude, and a full comprehension of the covenantal responsibilities involved.
Addressing the Paedocommunionist Argument
The paedocommunionist perspective often presents a strawman argument, suggesting that withholding communion from covenant children is an act of denying them something rightfully theirs. However, this viewpoint fails to recognize the God-ordained stages of growth and understanding in a child’s life. Faith is not static; it develops, matures, and deepens over time. To admit a child prematurely would not be an act of covenantal faithfulness but of spiritual neglect—failing to prepare them for the weight of what it means to partake of Christ’s body and blood in a worthy manner.
Affirming their covenant status while patiently shepherding them through catechesis and discipleship does not deny them grace but protects them from harm and equips them for deeper spiritual growth. Parents, alongside the church, should focus on fostering their understanding of sin, repentance, and the gospel so that when they do come to the Table, they do so with full assurance and understanding.
A Balanced Approach
Rather than rushing our children to the Table at the earliest confession, we should rejoice in their growing faith while lovingly shepherding them toward maturity. By affirming their covenant identity through discipleship and prayerful guidance, we prepare them to approach communion in a way that truly honors Christ. Waiting until they reach a stage of maturity where they can partake rightly is an act of loving protection and faithful stewardship of their spiritual well-being. In doing so, we fulfill our God-given responsibility to train them in the faith, trusting in His perfect timing for their spiritual growth and readiness.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the consistent biblical, theological, and historical witness affirms that the Lord’s Supper is intended for those who can engage in genuine self-examination and conscious faith. The requirement to discern the Lord’s body, as emphasized by Scripture and expounded upon by church fathers, Reformers, Puritans, and contemporary theologians, underscores the necessity of spiritual maturity for worthy participation. To administer the sacrament to those incapable of such discernment not only risks profaning the ordinance but also diminishes its intended role as a means of grace for the believer’s nourishment and growth. Upholding the biblical standard of self-examination ensures that the Lord’s Table remains a sacred act of worship, reserved for those who can partake with understanding, faith, and repentance.
Heritage Covenant Church (HCC) fully embraces and supports this historic Reformed position, affirming that the Lord’s Supper is a covenantal meal for those who have made a credible profession of faith and are able to examine themselves in light of Scripture. In doing so, HCC seeks to honor the biblical mandate and preserve the integrity of this sacred ordinance for the edification of the church and the glory of God.
RESOURCES:
ARTICLES:
What Should We Think About Paedocommunion? May 21, 2024 | Guy Waters
Is Paedocommunion BIblical? Guy Waters
By Joey Pipa January 16, 2013
Is Paedocommunion Biblical? Cornelis Venema
The Presbyterian Church in America: [7th General Assembly, 1979,7-23, p. 77] REPORT OF THE AD-INTERIM COMMITTEE ONPAEDOCOMMUNION[1984-1988]
URC: ACTS OF SYNOD SCHERERVILLE 2007 THE SIXTH SYNOD OF THE UNITED REFORMED CHURCHES IN NORTH AMERICA JULY 9-13, 2007
PAEDOCOMMUNION: A BIBLICAL EXAMINATION by Brian Schwertley
BOOKS:
Children at the Lord's Table? Assessing the Case for Paedocommunion (Venema) order here
Authentic Christianity: An Exposition of the Theology and Ethics of the Westminster Larger Catechism
PODCASTs:
#33 - Paedocommunion
Confessing Our Hope: The Podcast of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
Joel Beeke: Self-Examination
VIDEOS:
APPENDIX: Rebutting Arguments for Paedo-Communion with the Historic Reformed Position
The practice of paedo-communion—the admission of infants and young children to the Lord's Supper—has gained traction among some within the Reformed tradition. Advocates argue that covenant children should partake of the sacrament based on theological and pastoral considerations. However, the historic Reformed position, grounded in Scripture and affirmed by early church fathers, medieval theologians, Reformers, Second Reformation theologians, Puritans, and modern Reformed scholars, firmly refutes these claims. This appendix will provide a thorough rebuttal of the arguments for paedo-communion, demonstrating the wisdom of the church's longstanding practice of requiring mature, professing faith before admission to the Lord's Table.
1. Covenant Theology and Inclusion
Paedo-Communion Argument: Covenant children, by virtue of their baptism, should receive the Lord's Supper as a sign of their inclusion in the covenant community, similar to circumcision under the Old Covenant.
Rebuttal:
Early Church Fathers: Augustine of Hippo argued that "faith must precede the sacrament; if it does not, then what is received is condemnation, not grace," demonstrating that sacramental participation requires an active, professed faith.
Reformers: John Calvin explicitly maintained that the Lord’s Supper differs from baptism, writing in Institutes (4.17.40), "The Lord’s Supper is not for infants because it requires discernment and the exercise of faith in the promises of God."
Modern Theologians: R.C. Sproul emphasized that baptism signifies inclusion in the covenant, whereas the Lord's Supper requires an understanding of Christ's atonement and an active engagement in self-examination.
2. Jesus’ Teaching on Children
Paedo-Communion Argument: Jesus welcomed children into the kingdom of God (Matthew 19:14), implying that they should not be denied access to the Supper.
Rebuttal:
Early Church Fathers: Cyril of Jerusalem emphasized the need for catechesis before partaking in the Eucharist, stating, "Before approaching the holy mysteries, let the catechumens be taught, that they may approach in faith and reverence."
Puritans: Thomas Watson affirmed that children should be instructed and able to profess their faith before participating in the Supper, as it is meant to confirm their understanding of salvation.
Modern Theologians: Joel Beeke counters that Christ's invitation to children refers to their place in the covenant community but does not negate the need for personal, professing faith before participating in the sacrament.
3. The Nature of Faith
Paedo-Communion Argument: Faith is not merely intellectual but relational and covenantal, and children possess a simple, trusting faith that qualifies them for the Supper.
Rebuttal:
Reformers: The Westminster Confession of Faith (29.8) explicitly states, "Ignorant and ungodly persons are not to be admitted to the Lord’s Table."
Second Reformation Theologians: Wilhelmus à Brakel writes, "The Supper is for those who have a spiritual hunger and thirst, not for those who have yet to be taught the basics of the faith."
Modern Theologians: Beeke and Sproul stress the importance of a tested, examined faith that demonstrates an understanding of sin and grace before admittance to the Supper.
4. The Parallel Between Baptism and the Lord’s Supper
Paedo-Communion Argument: Since baptism and the Lord’s Supper are both sacraments, they should be administered equally to covenant members.
Rebuttal:
Medieval Theologians: Thomas Aquinas distinguished between baptism, which regenerates, and the Eucharist, which nourishes, asserting that the latter requires conscious participation.
Reformers: Calvin argued that while baptism welcomes a person into the covenant, the Lord’s Supper requires spiritual discernment and self-examination.
Modern Theologians: R.C. Sproul affirmed that baptism is the sign of entrance into the covenant, but the Supper is a sign of ongoing faith and repentance.
5. The Example of Passover
Paedo-Communion Argument: Children participated in the Passover meal under the Old Covenant, and thus should be admitted to the Lord's Supper.
Rebuttal:
Early Church Fathers: John Chrysostom emphasized that unlike Passover, the Lord’s Supper requires self-examination and repentance.
Second Reformation Theologians: Petrus van Mastricht warns against drawing direct comparisons between Old Testament feasts and the New Testament sacrament, which demands personal faith.
Puritans: Richard Baxter argued that the Lord's Supper's spiritual depth necessitates instruction and understanding.
6. The Nurturing Aspect of the Lord’s Supper
Paedo-Communion Argument: The Lord’s Supper is a means of grace that nurtures faith in young children.
Rebuttal:
Reformers: The Heidelberg Catechism (Q&A 81) states that the Supper is for those who are displeased with themselves because of their sins and trust in Christ.
Puritans: John Owen maintained that the Supper strengthens faith that is already conscious and active, rather than serving as a converting ordinance.
Modern Theologians: Joel Beeke emphasizes that withholding the Supper allows time for proper catechesis and ensures a genuine understanding of its significance.
Conclusion: Upholding the Historic Reformed Position
The historic Reformed tradition consistently affirms that the Lord's Supper is reserved for professing believers who can examine themselves and discern the body of Christ. The arguments for paedo-communion, while appealing on pastoral and covenantal grounds, fail to align with the biblical and theological requirements upheld throughout church history.
By maintaining this position, the church seeks to safeguard the sacrament’s integrity and nurture covenant children in a way that prepares them for meaningful participation in the Lord's Table at the appropriate time.
As Augustine once wrote,
"The sacraments must be approached in faith, not mere participation."
This enduring conviction protects the spiritual well-being of the church and ensures that the Supper remains a true means of grace for all who come in faith.
Comments