1. What is the current position of the CRC with regards to children at the Lord’s Supper?
Currently the church experiences some confusion on this matter. In the past the practice has always been that baptized members are admitted to the Lord’s Supper upon a public profession of their faith. Normally, such a profession was not made before the latter years of high school. In 1988, synod gave encouragement to the churches that younger children should be admitted to the Lord’s Supper by way of profession of faith. Synod said, “Covenant children should be encouraged to make public profession of faith as soon as they exhibit faith and are able to discern the body and remember and proclaim the death of Jesus in celebrating the Lord’s Supper.” And then it added, “Since the Bible establishes no specific age requirement, the common practice of delaying profession of faith even though faith is present has no biblical warrant.” (Acts of Synod 1988, Art.74, page 559). In 1995, synod affirmed that even though younger children are in view, their admission to the Lord’s Supper still requires a profession of faith.
However in 2006, in response to an overture, synod allowed “for the admission of all baptized members to the Lord’s Supper on the basis of their full membership in the covenant community” (Acts of Synod 2006, Art.71, page 730). However, because this decision involves a major policy change, it requires a ratification by the following synod before it becomes official.
Since the Synod of 2007 did not ratify this decision of 2006 it is no longer in effect.
Therefore the current position of the CRC regarding children and the Lord’s Supper is that baptized children are to be admitted to the Lord’s Supper upon an age-appropriate expression of their faith. However the church is exhorted to encourage her children to seek admission to the Lord’s Table as soon as such faith is present.
2. Why are we talking about all of this now?
A variety of reasons have been suggested and it seems they have all come together simultaneously:
- A deepening desire throughout the denomination to lead our children into the profound grace of our Lord Jesus Christ in every way that we can.
- An awareness that within the CRC two quite different viewpoints of interpretation of I Corinthians 11 continue to function.
- A weakening of the walls between various Christian traditions, which reveals that the Christian Reformed practice is among the most restrictive and leads us to ask why this is so.
- A continued wrestling with trying to achieve the balance between receiving communion as a wondrous gift and a means of grace and sensing that it is a precious privilege that warrants accountability.
- Confusion and ambivalence concerning healthy practice of the call to profession of faith.
- A growing sense that the relationship between baptism and communion and the relationship between the Passover and communion having not been properly articulated in traditional Christian Reformed practice.
These six factors do not point to clear conclusions concerning these matters, but they do point to the need for discussion and study of the issue.
3. Isn’t the teaching of I Corinthians 11 perfectly clear?
For generations the Christian Reformed church has used its preparatory communion forms to teach that mature self-examination is a prerequisite for participation, and this teaching was based on I Cor. 11: “Beloved in Jesus Christ, since we hope next Lord’s day to celebrate the blessed sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, we are called to prepare our hearts by rightly examining ourselves. For the apostle Paul has written: ‘Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup’ (I Cor. 11: 27-28).” According to this interpretation and application, children who are not mature enough to conduct such self-examination may not participate.
The force of generations of repetition has left the impression that this is the only proper interpretation of this passage. But a careful reading of the context suggests that another interpretation is also worth pursuing. The context tells us that:
- The church in Corinth suffered from many divisions (11: 18).
- Communion practices expressed these divisions, and were so dysfunctional that some members became drunk on communion wine before others had even arrived to worship (11: 21).
- Paul is compelled to instruct them concerning how the body of Christ is one though it consists of many different members (ch. 12), that agape/love binds the community together (ch. 13), and that in its worship, various gifts are exercised appropriately so that worship is practiced “in a fitting and orderly way” (ch. 14).
When we note this context, the verse that follows the two verses used in the CRC preparatory form takes on profound meaning: “For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself” (vs. 29). The phrase “body of the Lord” points us in two directions: (1) the body of the Lord who died for us, calling us to personal examination concerning our walk with the Lord [as the form does], (2) the body of the Lord as the community of believers [as the metaphor is used in ch. 12], calling us to corporate examination concerning our spiritual health as a community.
Some commentators observe that this text should take us in this second, communal direction, and ask questions such as, “are we truly a Christian community that includes all members?” “In what ways are we saying to certain members, ‘We don’t need you,’ (12: 21)?” “Who are the contemporary equivalents of the Grecian widows who are being overlooked” (Acts 6: 1)?
This second, communal direction in which I Cor. 11 takes us challenges us also to ask the question, “If we prevent children from participating in communion, are we guilty of not recognizing the body of the Lord?” Though the answer to this question is not immediately clear, the passage does properly challenge us to explore the question.
One of the major tasks of the Faith Formation Committee will be that of assessing these positions and arguments.
4. What is the practice of other Reformed denominations on this matter?
Many Reformed denominations are engaged in conversations about this subject at this time. The following give us a picture of the landscape of the churches and their positions on this matter.
- In the early church all baptized persons were welcomed to the Lord’s Table. This practice was gradually abandoned in the 12th and 13th centuries. The Protestant Reformers did not give consideration to reversing this abandonment of the practice of welcoming children to the Lord’s Table.
- Many denominations currently practice confirmation which welcomes children of elementary school age to communion after a period of instruction, while others provide confirmation after their first communion.
- Significant variation in others denominations in remarkable, with each marked by vigorous pro and con voices.
- The Reformed Church of America currently allows young children to come to the Lord’s Table upon the evidence of faith and the permission of the parents and elders.
- The Presbyterian Church USA says “Baptized members are entitled to the pastoral care and instruction of the church and to participate in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.”
- In the Presbyterian Church of American (PCA) the customary practice is to admit to the Lord’s Table only those who “are of years and ability to examine themselves” and make a formal profession of faith, however they are allowed to hear a profession of faith of a younger child, and this would not entail full membership but would allow the child to participate in the Lord’s Supper.
- The Presbyterian Church of Canada requires a profession of faith in Christ and obedience to him before admission to the Lord’s Table.
- The Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) requires a profession of faith before admission to the Table of the Lord.
- The Christian Reformed Churches of Australia has claimed that “there are no Scriptural grounds to continue the Reformational practice of requiring a profession of faith by baptized members of the covenant community before seeking to take part in the Lords’ Supper” and parents, with the prior approval of the Session, are given discretion of allowing their children to participate.
5. Won’t admitting baptized children to the Lord’s Supper undermine the importance of Profession of Faith?
This fear has frequently been expressed. It seems to arise from the concern that if profession of faith receives its significance from the fact that it grants one the right to come to the Lord’s Table, then it potentially loses its significance if children may come to the table on the basis of their baptism, or at any time prior to profession of faith. Perhaps this might be so. However, there are several other considerations which tell us that profession of faith receives its weighty significance from other factors also.
The church has always taught that the Bible tells us that our profession of our faith has a far greater significance than to be a gateway to the table. Through our profession of faith we declare to God, our fellow believers, and the world that we “confess with our mouth that ‘Jesus is Lord’, and believe with our heart that God raised him from the dead” (Romans 10:9) for our salvation.
The church has also given consideration to the fact that even if young children come to the Table of the Lord, we should still “devise an appropriate means for securing a commitment to the creeds of the Christian Reformed Church and to the responsibilities of adult membership in the local congregation from confessing members who, having attained the age of 18, have not yet made such a commitment.” (Acts of Synod 1995, Art. 69, page 720).
The Faith Formation Committee is committed to carefully evaluate all these considerations in the course of its study and discussion.
6. What curriculum is currently available regarding faith formation?
Faith Alive Christian Resources and other ministries provide very helpful material on this subject. Their materials include, but are not limited to:
7. What are the various options that the church is considering on this matter of children at the Lord’s Table?
While answering this question, we must remember that the church does have a current position on the matter (see the answer to Question 1 above). However, the church is continuing its conversations and studies in this manner. Theoretically, we may say that there are four possible options that are under consideration by various members of the CRC.
- That profession of faith is required for admission to the table of the Lord, and it is best if profession of faith is made during the late teen years.
- That younger children should be admitted to the Lord’s Table after making an age-appropriate public profession of their faith.
- That children should be allowed to come to the Lord’s Table before making a public profession of faith, but after reaching an age in which they are able to understand that the bread and cup offer us participation in Christ’s body and blood, with a decision about their participation entrusted to parents or guardians.
- That all baptized members of the church should participate at the Lord’s Table, regardless of their level of understanding. This allows for their admission to the Lord’s Table solely on the basis of their baptism.
8. Does admitting children to the Lord’s Supper square with the Reformed Confessions?
This subject certainly will be part of the debate and discussion that we must have. The Heidelberg Catechism, Q/A 81 and 82 and Belgic Confession of Faith, art. 35 are the portions that most directly address this practice. Professor Lyle Bierma of Calvin Theological Seminary admits that at first glance, these portions of the confessions appear to prohibit the entrance of children to the Lord’s Table. But he goes on to say that if we study them more carefully and consider their intent, we must admit that the confessions were concerned about something other than admitting children to the Lord’s Table. They were concerned not so much about children but about fencing the table against the ungodly and unrepentant who were mature enough to believe but willfully refused to do so. In addition, At the same time, the confessions suggest that both of the sacraments are a sign and seal of the promises of God (that is, receiving the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit), to the whole covenant community. (Heidelberg Catechism, Q/A 74,61)
Therefore it is possible to read the confessions in either way. We must admit, however, that our traditional interpretation of I Corinthians 11 seems to be written into the confessions, and has steered us in our interpretation of the confessions. Therefore, we will carefully assess all these considerations in our understanding of the Confessions.
9. What is the difference between infant baptism and infant dedication?
Though it is often easy for many folks to assume that the difference between the two is not great, the fact of the matter is—the difference is substantial!
Infant dedication is usually understood to be an act of parents by which they make their personal commitment to train this child in the ways of the Lord and ask for the blessing of both the Lord and the Christian community.
Infant baptism, on the other hand, is an act of the church through which God extends to the child the sign and seal of his covenant promises to be his/her God. This promise is extended through the water of baptism. After God has spoken through the baptism and has given the child the sign of his promise, the parents respond with the dedication of their child to God and the commitment train the child in the ways of the Lord and the church responds with a promise of support and encouragement.
Thus, in infant dedication the parents act, in baptism God acts first and parents respond.
10. What exactly is the position of the CRC now about infant baptism and dedication?
The Christian Reformed Church has always been committed to the sacrament of infant baptism as a sign of God’s covenant relationship with the children of believers. The Heidelberg Catechism (Lord’s Day 27, Q/A 74) expresses the confession of the CRC very clearly on this matter.
In 2007, synod received an Overture requesting that it appoint a study committee to “study the growing practice of infant dedication and the practice of infant dedication.” Synod did not agree to this overture, and instead affirmed “the church’s commitment to the practice of covenant baptism” and “discouraged the practice of infant dedication”. (Acts of Synod 2007, Article 71, page 659) In making this reaffirmation of the church’s commitment to infant baptism synod said, “The practice of infant dedication can never replace the beauty of the expression of God’s covenant grace communicated in the sacrament of baptizing infants.” And “the practice of baptizing infants is the normative practice prescribed by the Reformed Confessions (HC Q. and A. 74; BC Art.34; and Church Order Art.56.)”
Synod 2007 placed this topic on our agenda by affirming its commitment to infant baptism, strongly discouraging the practice of infant dedication, and asking the Faith Formation Committee to provide biblical and pastoral guidance for councils who are conversing with those members who are requesting infant dedication in place of infant baptism. (See Acts of Synod 2007, p.621)
