What Is The Appropriate Age For Receiving First Communion?

1

What Is The Appropriate Age For Receiving First Communion?

2

Scriptural Background and Principles Concerning the

“Worthy” Reception of the Lord’s Supper

3

Scriptural Background & Principles Concerning “Worthy Reception”

• 1 Corinthians 11.– 18 --- “divisions;” “haves and haves not”– 20,21 --- “It was no longer ‘the Lord’s Supper’

that was the highlight of their gatherings.– Rather, each person’s chief interest had

become ‘his own supper’” (Lockwood. 1 Corinthians. p. 383)-- the agape meal and the Sacrament were

blended

4

1 Corinthians 11 cont.– 22 the rich were inconsiderate/drunk

• “eat your meals at home!”• loveless behavior• “I have no praise for you”• The problem in Corinth was an internal abuse of the Sacrament and of the

less fortunate in the congregation

– 27 “unworthy manner” --- “The important exegetical step is to let the context, especially 11.20-22,28-31, define what it means to receive the supper in a worthy manner and in an unworthy manner” (Ibid. p. 396)

– 27 the Corinthians were “sinning against the body and blood of the Lord,” they were dishonoring Christ by failing to recognize that they were receiving his body and blood in, with and under the bread and wine

– 28 --- “examine himself” --- in order to receive the Sacrament in a worthy manner the communicant needs to be able to examine him/herself and understand the need for this Sacrament because of his/her sinful nature

5

1 Corinthians 11. cont

– 29 --- “without recognizing” the Lord’s body the communicant “eats and drinks judgment on himself”

• “This participial phrase is conditional: a person eats and drinks judgment if he eats and drinks without discerning that the Lord’s body is present” (Ibid. p.397).

• “Some of the Corinthians were failing to distinguish the Lord’s body in his Supper from common food. They failed to discern that Christ’s body and blood truly were present” (Ibid).

6

1 Corinthians 11 cont.• Understanding “unworthy eating” to involve both sinning

against faith (11.29-30) and love (11.20-22) is not a recent interpretation.– They were not coming to the Lord’s Supper with any other spirit

or in any greater reverence than in their private homes where they sat down to their ordinary meals. Likewise they were nourishing hatred in their hearts; they were despising the church, shaming the poor, not abstaining from idolatrous practices; they were even coming to the celebration of the Supper drunk --- and yet, although this was so and they remained without true repentance and living faith, they still came to the table of the Lord. This Paul calls unworthy eating (Ibid. p. 399. Quoting M. Chemnitz, “The Lord’s Supper.” p. 128).

7

The failure or inability to examine oneself and discern or recognize the Lord’s body makes a person

unworthy to receive the Sacrament.

1 Corinthians 11.27,29 --

8

FROM THE CONFESSIONS

9

The Confessions, cont.“We do not hold that only one kind of Sacrament is to be

given (e.g. the bread alone). We do not need that ‘high reasoning’ that teaches there is as much under the one kind as under both, as the sophists and the Council of Constance teach. Even if that were true, giving the one kind only is not the entire ordinance and institution commanded by Christ…As for transubstantiation, we care nothing about the sophist cunning by which they teach that bread and wine leave or lose their own natural substance so that only the appearance and color of bread remain, and not true bread…Paul calls it ‘the bread that we break’ (1 Cor 10.16) and ‘Let a person…so eat of the bread” (1 Cor 11.28). Smalcald Articles. VI. p. 305, #2ff

10

The Confessions, cont.• Who, then, receives such Sacrament worthily?• Answer: Fasting and bodily preparation is,

indeed, a fine outward training. But a person is truly worthy and well prepared who has faith in these words, “Given…and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins.”

• But anyone who does not believe these words, or doubts, is unworthy and unfit. For the words “for you” require hearts that truly believe.

• (Small Catechism. VI. p. 369).

11

The Confessions, cont.• “In fact, Luther suggests that

those who do not know the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer by heart should not receive the Lord’s Supper. He provides these texts as the most necessary parts of Christian doctrine, which should be learned until they can be repeated, word for word, by heart, from memory. (Large Catechism. Short Preface. p. 382)

• “Luther urges Christians to receive the Sacrament frequently. Those who realize the enormity of their sin, how many dangers abound, and how great Christ’s gifts are that are given in the Sacrament will receive the Lord’s Supper as often as possible” (Large Catechism. “The Sacrament of the Altar.” p. 457)

12

The Confessions, cont.• “Now we must also see who is the person that receives this power and benefit. That

is answered briefly, as we said above about Baptism and often elsewhere: Whoever believes the words has what they declare and bring. For they are not spoken or proclaimed to stone and wood, but to those who hear them, to whom he says, ‘Take, eat,’ and so on. Because he offers and promises forgiveness of sin, it cannot be received except by faith. This faith he himself demands in the Word when he says, ‘Given…and shed for you,’ as if he said, ‘For this reason I give it, and ask you to eat and drink it, that you may claim it as yours and enjoy it.’ Whoever now accepts these words and believes that what they declare is true has forgiveness. But whoever does not believe it has nothing, since he allows it to be offered to him in vain and refuses to enjoy such a saving good. The treasure, indeed, is opened and placed at everyone’s door, yes, upon his table. But it is necessary that you also claim it and confidently view it as the words tell you. This is the entire Christian preparation for receiving this Sacrament worthily. Since this treasure is entirely presented in the words, it cannot be received and made ours in any other way than with the heart. Such a gift and eternal treasure cannot be seized with the fist. Fasting, prayer,, and other such things may indeed be outward preparations and discipline for children, so that the body may keep and bring itself modestly and reverently to receive Christ’s body and blood. Yet the body cannot seize and make its own what is given in and with the Sacrament. This is done by the faith in the heart, which discerns this treasure and desires it” (Large Catechism. p. 461-462).

13

The Confessions, cont.• Luther assumes that those

who commune are old enough both to be tempted to sin, and resist that temptation, and old enough to be strengthened in faith and use the power of God’s Word to accomplish that” (Ibid. p. 460. #24-27).

• “Luther assumes that those who commune are old enough to understand the words that are spoken which offer and give the forgiveness of sins.

• The words are: Take and eat; this is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me…Drink from it, all of you; this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for you for the forgiveness of sins.”

14

The Confessions, cont.• Luther assumes that

those who commune are old enough to desire to remember Christ’s sacrifice, and to desire the forgiveness of sins offered and to receive this sacrifice often” (Large Catechism. p. 462 #39-50)

• Luther assumes that those who commune are old enough to hunger for the Sacrament and to be aware of their sinful state (Large Catechism. p. 465. #75-76

15

The Confessions, cont.• Luther assumes that

those who commune are old enough to be misled by Satan and the world and lose a hunger for the Sacrament (Large Catechism. p. 466. #83-84).

• Luther assumes that those who commune are old enough to understand

• the content of the chief parts of Scripture. He never says anything about infants receiving the Sacrament. (Large Catechism. p. 466. #85-87).

• Luther assumes that those who commune are old enough to do what Jesus commands, “Take and eat…Take drink.”

16

What does it mean to “discern” the body of Christ” (1 Cor 11.29)?

• To discern the body of Christ means to recognize and believe that the body of Christ received in the Supper is truly present in the bread, but at the same time is to be distinguished from common food and recognized as sacramental food, established to be such by the word and promise of Christ. “Take eat, this is my body” (1 Cor 11.24; Mt 26.26; 1 Cor 10.16)

17

Discerning the body, cont.• “The key to communing in a worthy manner is the ability and

willingness to ‘discern the body’ (11.29)…It consists of repentance and faith, and these move in two directions at the same time. Repentance applies to sin committed against God in general, the vertical dimension…such repentance also applies specifically and especially to one’s relationship to fellow communicants, the horizontal dimension” (Lockwood. p. 401. quoting from ‘Admission to the Lord’s Supper: Basics of Biblical Confessional Teaching,’ a report of the CTCR of the LC-MS).

18

Discerning the body, cont.

• Again… “discerning the body” (11.29) refers to the sacramental body of Christ, which is present with the bread that is eaten in the Lord’s Supper (Ibid. p. 402)– Any reference to “the body” in this chapter is a

reference to Christ’s sacramental body– 11.24 – This (bread) is my body– 11.29 – Some were “guilty of sinning against

the body and blood of the Lord”

19


– Including the “blood of the Lord” along side “body” requires that body in 11.24,27,29 refers to the body of Christ given and eaten with the bread in the Sacrament

– Some claim that “body” in 1 Corinthians 11 refers metaphorically to the church, the “body of Christ.” If that were true, what is “the blood” of the Lord referred to metaphorically? Nothing is said about a connection with blood.

20


• Paul is verbally chastising the members of the church in Corinth because some are acting in a loveless way toward other members, and because all of them failed to recognize the difference between the agape meal and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, which was a sin against the Lord’s body.

21

“Let a man examine himself” (11.28)

• Compare these passages– “Test yourselves to see whether you are in the faith.

Examine yourselves” (2 Cor 13.5)– “…let each person examine his own work” (Gal 6.4).– To examine oneself in 11.28 means to be reflective

both in the Corinthian relationship to each other and in recognizing the sacramental reality of the Lord’s Supper and how they were sinning against the Lord’s body. That examination was to result in a change of attitude lest judgment and not a blessing from God would be the result.

22

This self-examination…• is intended to preclude sinning against the

Lord’s body and blood and bringing judgment on oneself because of the failure to “discern the body.”

• Entails…– Believing that the true and physical body and blood of

the Lord are present in the bread and wine– Desiring to receive the forgiveness of sins which is

promised to those who receive this Supper– Resolving to fulfill the royal law by loving God and

neighbor, i.e. to amend one’s sinful life and to live at peace with others.

23

Self-examination• This “examination” is a thoughtful self-evaluation that

requires an informed faith that goes beyond the saving faith of an infant

• The meaning of dokimazo (examine in 11.28) cannot “be reduced to merely the equivalent of metanoew, ‘repent,’ or pisteuw, ‘believe, have faith.’ The verb dokimazo ‘examine,’ in 1 John 4.1 involves the intellect, or theological acumen. “Test the spirits, whether they are from God.” Such testing or self-examination would not be possible for infants or very young children (or, for example, for an unconscious or comatose person) (Ibid. p. 407).

24

• “Second…regarding the communing of children, it needs to be recognized that this falls outside Paul’s immediate purview. Luther commented, ‘When in 1 Cor 11.28 Paul said that a man should examine himself, he sopke only of adults because he was speaking about those adults who were quarelling among themselves. However, he doesn’t here forbid that the sacrament of the altar be given even to children.’ Presumably Luther meant children who had been sufficiently instructed so as to recognize that the Lord’s body and blood are given with bread and wine, and to be able to examine themselves” (Ibid. p. 407).

25

Communion/Confirmation Practice in the History of the

Church

26

There is no clear evidence as to the age when Communion was first received in the immediate

post-apostolic era.

27

Age of First Communion• Tertullian (died, c. 220 CE) wrote, “With respect

to children, it is preferable to defer baptism…let them come when they are growing up, when they are of an age to be instructed, where they have acquired a knowledge of what they are coming to. Let them become Christians when they have the capacity to know Christ” (Gehlbach. p. 3)

• Cyprian ( c. 250 CE) made reference to baptized persons being reborn “by both sacraments” (although the meaning of a sacrament was not yet clearly defined)

28

First Communion, cont.• In one account Cyprian speaks of a “little

daughter under the care of a wet-nurse” who is given the Eucharist (Strawbridge, p.4, quoting the Ante-Nicene Fathers. Vol V. p. 258)

• Justin Martyr (died 165 CE) describes the initiation into the church from Baptism through to the Eucharist. Children are not excluded.

• Origen (died 254 CE) likewise confirms the practice of baptism, anointing (confirmation/chrismation), and the Eucharist, including infants.

29

Age of First Communion, cont.• From the “Apostolic Traditions of Hippolytus” (late 2nd century),

“They were taken by the deacon into the water --- infants (for whom their parents spoke) and children first…Coming out of the water the candidates were…dried, clothed, and brought to the assembled church. Then the bishop laid his hand on each with prayer…the rite continued with a celebration of the Eucharist, in which the newly baptized participated for the first time” (Ibid.)

• From “The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles” (Book 8, chapter 13) dated not later than the fourth century, in the chapter attributed to James, the brother of John, son of Zebedee, says, “And after that, let the bishop partake, then the presbyters…then the children…with reverence and godly fear…let the deacon say: Now we have received the precious body and the precious blood of Christ” (Ibid.)

30

Age of First Communion, cont.• Augustine (354-430 CE) refers to “ancient and apostolic

tradition” saying, ‘If then as so many divine testimonies do agree, neither salvation nor eternal life is to be hoped for by any, without baptism and the body and blood of the Lord, it is in vain promised to infants without them” (Ibid. p.5).

• Augustine: “They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves” (Ibid.)

• From the third century until the twelfth and thirteenth century there is overwhelming evidence that the Western Church regularly brought her infants and young children to participate in the Lord’s Supper. This is evidenced by several primary sources and substantiated by numerous secondary sources” (Ibid.).

31

Age of First Communion, cont.• The Didascalia Apostolorum (3rd century) briefly

mentions baptism. The initiates were primarily pagans and were required to have sponsors. The initiation included integrating them into the Christian community, receiving oral instruction, being anointed (chrismation), being baptized by immersion and celebrating the Eucharist (Gehlbach. p. 3).

• John Chrysostom (4th century) offers a similar description.

• A 6th century document, Letter of John the Deacon, states, “Lest I seem to have passed over something, I clearly and quickly say that all these things are done even to infants, who by reason of their age understand nothing” (Ibid.).

32

COMMUNING INFANTS IN THE WESTERN CHURCH WAS

DISCONTINUED

33

Infant Communion Discontinued, cont.

• From the 6th to the12th centuries both Eastern (Orthodox) and Western Churches communed infants at the time of their baptism

• The Western Church considered baptism, confirmation and Eucharist as separate rites, unlike the Eastern Church which considered them to be three parts of the one rite of initiation.

• In the Ordo Romanus XI it is recorded that “After this (baptism) they (infants) go in to mass and all infants receive communion. Communion is to be taken lest after they have been baptized they receive any food or suckling before they communicate (and ruin the effect of fasting)” (Gehlbach. p. 4 of 9)

34

Infant Communion Discontinued, cont

• One minor change: when a bishop was not available the local presbyter could baptize and commune the initiate. But confirmation would be delayed until the bishop was present (Ibid. p. 5).

• Churches in Milan, Northern Italy, Gaul, Germany and Spain all followed the same practice into the 12th century: baptism, anointing (unction with chrismation for the imparting of the Holy Spirit), and Eucharist, including infants.

35


• Up until the 12th century the Western and Eastern churches were concerned that no infant or sick person die without communion (Ibid. p. 6)

36


• In the later 11th century…doubts began to arise about the propriety of communing infants and sick persons in consequence of a growing “scrupulosity” regarding the consecrated elements, itself a result of the gradual victory of Realism over Symbolism. Paschasius Radbertus, in a work published in 844, that the substance of the bread and wine used in the Eaucharist was inwardly and effectively changed into the flesh and blood of Christ, the bread from heaven…In the circumstances the church began to feel uneasy about the communion of persons who might not be able to swallow the host (Ibid. p. 6).

37

Two (at least) unbiblical principles that first allowed infant communion, then took it away

1) A person (including infants) needed to receive the Eucharist lest he/she should die and not be saved.

2) Due to the notion that the bread changed in substance into the body of Christ, an infant, or anyone, who spit out the “body of Jesus” and did not swallow it, was violating the body of Christ which then had to be cleaned up and disposed of into the garbage.

• The earliest known use of the term "transubstantiation" to describe the change from bread and wine to body and blood of Christ was by Hildebert de Savardin, Archbishop of Tours (died 1133)…and by the end of the twelfth century the term was in widespread use. In 1215, the Fourth Council of the Lateran spoke of the bread and wine as "transubstantiated" into the body and blood of Christ:..The Council of Trent (1545 – 1563) defined transubstantiation as "that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood – the species only of the bread and wine remaining.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Council_of_the_Lateran

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Trent

38


• This was the beginning of yet another unbiblical practice, communion in one kind.– Pope Paschal II (died 1118)

wrote, “We know that bread by itself and wine by itself were given by the Lord. That custom should always be maintained…except in the case of infants and sick persons who cannot swallow bread” (Ibid. p. 7)

– In 1121 William of Champeaux wrote, “To little children only the chalice is given, because they cannot assimilate the bread, and in the chalice they receive the entire Christ (sub specie sanguinis)” (Ibid. p. 7).

• Also at the School of Anselm (d. 1117), “…since it is necessary to eternal life to receive the Lord’s body…once it has been received (at baptism) another reception of the sacrament can be deferred for a long time” (Ibid.)

• The priest would dip his finger into the “blood-filled” chalice, then put his finger into the infant’s mouth, because infants were able to suck.

39


• The cup was removed from both infants and adults because:– The doctrine of Transbustantiation caused the

laity to be afraid of spilling the blood of Christ and chose to refrain from the sacrament altogether

– The cup was removed from infants without any objection from the laity

40


In addition the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) established the requirement that prior to communicating “the faithful must go to confession…the council linked first communion with attaining the age of discretion, thus moving first communion to a point later in the child’s life (age 7).

• As late as 1548 (Council of Augsburg) it was necessary to state that giving the sacrament to infants was forbidden

• John Hus reintroduced the practice of communing infants in Bohemia (refer to Luther quote later in this document)

41


It should also be mentioned that as the church grew through childbirth, and with the Western Church’s requirement that only a bishop had the authority to confirm a child, it because physically impossible for a bishop to be present at the congregations throughout his territory to grant the rite of confirmation, it became necessary to initiate a child into the church through baptism (which a local priest was authorized to administer) but to wait until older to grant the rite of confirmation, which included receiving first communion.

42

The Churches of the Reformation

• None of the churches of the Reformation era reintroduced infant communion– Calvin did not approve of it– The Anabaptists rejected infant baptism.

Infant communion was certainly not on their radar screen

– It is now in these modern times that some are wanting to reintroduce infant communion/ paedocommunion

43


• The ELCA: “The Use of the Means of Grace, adopted by the ELCA in 1997, states, ‘Admission to the Sacrament is by invitation of the Lord, presented through the church to those who are baptized….But infants and children may be communed for the first time when they are baptized, or may be brought to the altar for a blessing.’ The document concludes, ‘There is no command from our Lord regarding the age at which people should be baptized or first communed.’” (The Lutheran. May, 1998.p.21)

44


A lot of thought goes into establishing a policy that allows for infant communion… none of which is drawn from Scripture, but it does take quite an imagination to make this leap of logic

In December 2000 (p.11) issue of The Lutheran, a mother took exception to the “male supremacy” language of the Bible when referring to Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and concluded that this wording needed to be challenged in order for her to “reclaim my right to rely on feminine metaphors to gain insight into Christian spirituality,” which she now exercises when she prays to Jesus, her Mother.

45


ELCA cont --- She shared one other insight. “…as I nurse my baby the words ‘This is by body, given for you’ come to life in a new way. As I hold my daughter…I think of how far we have to go to fulfill our potential as caretakers of each other and the earth… Julian Norwich, a 13th century Christian mystic wrote poetry that portrayed the Eucharist as a feeding at the breast of Jesus our Mother.”

Conclusion: As long as you don’t think too hard about the scriptural principles regarding the Lord’s Supper (its purpose, its meaning and its recipients) one can turn it into anything and give it to anyone that one’s heart desires.

46


A Canadian district president of the LC-MS wrote a paper opposing infant communion which some of her pastors have reintroduced.

The CTCR of the LC-MS responded to questions regarding infant communion (see the bibliography).

• Some WELS-trained but no longer WELSified pastors are attempting to make a case for communicating infants.

47

Thought Process of Those Who Favor Infant Communion

• “We are children of God (1 Jn 3.1) who have been born of water and the Spirit (1 Jn 3.5), and that means the church whom our heavenly Father has given us life is our mother…a good mother feeds her children…as soon as they are born. And Christ has provided his beloved with the perfect body by which she can feed and so sustain the life of her children: ‘Take and eat. This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me. 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. Do this…in remembrance of me.’

48

Those Who Favor Infant Communion

• “So tell me, if a good mother feeds her children, and since Holy Mother Church has been given the perfect meal to feed the children that her Lord has given her through Holy Baptism, why do our congregations starve her children and put them into a fast in many cases for the first fourteen years of life?” (James A. Frey. Infant Communion: A Look at Lutheran Liturgical Practice.” p. 1)

49

However…

• Equating the need to feed the Lord’s body and blood to infants with the need for a mother to feed pablum to an infant is not a connection made by either Scripture or common sense.

• Infants are not being starved by not receiving communion, either physically or spiritually. They are nourished with the Word and water of Holy Baptism which feeds the Christian daily with the spiritual food of forgiveness throughout life on earth.

50


• Quoting Luther, “How can eating and drinking do such great things?It is certainly not the eating and drinking that does such things, but the words, ‘Given and poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins.’These words are the main thing in this sacrament, along with the eating and drinking.And whoever believes these words has what they plainly say, the forgiveness of sins.

• Who then is properly prepared to receive this sacrament?

• Fasting and other outward preparations may serve a good purpose, but he is properly prepared who believes these words: ‘Given and poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins.’

• But whoever does not believe these words our doubts them is not prepared, because the words, ‘for you,’ require nothing but hearts that believe.”

51


• Frey comments (Ibid. p. 2-3), “Why are we Lutherans so inconsistent in how we talk about faith? We support…infant baptism, stating that infants too can believe. We define it as trust…If an infant, blessed with faith, trusts in the grace and mercy of his God poured over him at the font, then surely he, blessed with faith, can also trust in the grace and mercy of his God given to him to eat and to drink at the altar.”

52

However…Baptism brings an infant to

faith through the miraculous power and promise of God. This is a saving faith, by all means (Jn 3.5; Mt 18.5,6; Lk 18.15-17; Acts 2; Titus 3.5.

The purpose of the Lord’s Supper is to strengthen that faith and itself requires an understanding that goes beyond the depth of faith/trust given in baptism

“While faith is not the same as conscious reason, the infant must still be brought up in the Lord. That way the infant’s baptismal faith becomes a conscious faith. While an infant is saved in baptism he or she can still fall away from the grace given in baptism. So Scripture is clear on bringing children up in the faith of their baptisms (Eph 6.4; Deut 6.7; Rom 6.3-4)…Infants must later be taught the meaning of their baptism for their lives” (A. Andrew Das. Baptized into God’s Family. p. 47).

53

More, However…The writer to the Hebrews (5.11-14) says, “We have much to say about this, but it is hard

to explain because you are slow to learn. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant (vapios, infant, minor child), is not acquainted with (Gr apeiros, describing a person who lacks experience, is untried or ignorant [Linguistic and Exegetical key to the Greek New Testament. P. 526] the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.”

The people reading this letter for the first time were not without faith. However their faith was lacking in knowledge and understanding and needed to be deepened and informed. In the same way, infants who receive a saving faith in baptism still need to have their faith deepened and informed in order to grasp deeper truths recorded in God’s Word and apply those truths to themselves with understanding and spiritual growth.

The 1 Corinthians 11 requirement to “examine” and “remember” and “recognize the body of the Lord” needs to be grasped with a more mature faith than that of an infant.

54

More, However…• Refusing communion to infants is not suggesting that

they are lacking faith any more than refusing to give a hamburger and fries to infants suggests that they are lacking a digestive system. However…– They can’t remember their birthday, much less Jesus’ death– They can’t examine the difference between a putter and a

pitching wedge, much less the sins of their heart– They can’t discern a meal of baked walleye much less a

sacramental meal of the Lord’s body and blood– Scripture calls for the baptism of “all nations,” but restricts those

who receive the Lord’s Supper by requiring self-examination, discernment of the Lord’s body and blood, and the remembering of Christ’s death

– Infants are not “worthy” to receive communion

55


• Referring to 1 Cor 11.27-29, Frey comments (Ibid. p.3), “…have (infants) been examined? Of course. Christ has examined the little children and said, ‘Of such is the kingdom of God.’…I think back to their baptism whey they renounced the devil and all his works and all his ways, confessed the Christian faith in the words of the Apostle’s Creed, and then confessed a desire to be baptized. I ask you, if they are not worthy to receive the body and blood of our Lord…then who is?”

• Frey and others argue also that because Hebrew children participated in eating the Passover meal, children also should participate with their families in eating and drinking the Lord’s Supper.

56

However, cont.Frey and others fail to

observe that:• infants would not have

received bread and wine when eating the Passover meal. They would have received whatever Hebrew mothers fed their infants at the time.

• If Passover and the Lord’s Supper are parallel “sacraments,” then the applications need to be parallel, but they aren’t.

• The Passover celebrated the release of the Hebrews from Egypt, but does not offer the forgiveness of sins

• The Passover was observed once a year on a set date of a set month, the Lord’s Supper is to be observed “often.”

57

Pieper• “Since according to God’s Word everyone who would approach the

Lord’s table should first examine himself and discern the Lord’s body, it will not do to give the Lord’s Supper to children incapable of examining themselves. It was a manifest abuse of this practice, as the examples of even Cyprian and Augustine prove…from the third to the fifth century, with the sanction also of Innocent I, through misinterpretation of John 6.53 as referring to sacramental eating and drinking… Luther writes, ‘I cannot side with the Bohemians in distributing the Lord’s Supper to children, even though I would not call them heretics on that account.’…those who are not to be admitted includes also those asleep, unconscious…(those) deprived of the use of their senses” (F. Pieper. Christian Dogmatics. Vol III, p. 383. ft nt 133)

58

Some of the Others Who Follow the Practice of Infant Communion

(Paedocommunion)• Eastern Orthodox Church• ELCA• Evangelical Catholic Church• Orthodox Presbyterian/Reformed• Sacramentum Defensum

(www.postdeliberatuslux.wordpress.com

59

Biblical Principles That Call for the Exclusion of Infants from Communion

• Hebrews 5.11-13 (see slide #53)

60

Exclude Infants• The writer does not accuse his

readers of being unbelievers but of being infants in the faith. While this is a saving faith, it is still a faith that lacks understanding of “solid food” biblical truths, like 1 Cor 11.27-29, which would keep infants from receiving the Lord’s Supper.

• Concerning 1 Cor 11.29, “discerning the Lord’s body,” Mark Tranvik, an ELCA pastor who (1995) received his Th. D. in the area of Lutheran sacramental theology, writes, “Discernment is a cognitive act. In what sense might an infant be able to perceive or appreciate the communal dimension of the supper? Are not those holding to this interpretation still stuck with the fact that an infant is being asked to ‘do’ something beyond his or her capacity?” (Should Infants be Communed? A Lutheran Per-spective. Mark Tranvik. Word & World.Vol XV, Number 1, winter 1995. p. 83)

61

Exclude Infants• “It is argued by supporters of infant communion that Luther and

Melanchthon did not commune infants only because they passed on, without question, the tradition passed on by the Fourth Lateran Council and Council of Trent. But this is a curious argument. Since when did the reformers not scrutinize the practices of the church (communion in one kind, clerical celibacy, et al.) to determine whether they were consistent with the gospel?...Luther found the practice of giving communion only to more mature believers to be perfectly consistent with the gospel and, therefore, continued the practice” (Ibid. p.77).

• Tranvik presents other arguments that are not acceptable. But here is one more of his observations: “Why is communion needed to complete it (baptism)? The sacrament of baptism, understood by Luther to be the ‘most precious jewel that could adorn body or soul,’ would be marginalized if infant communion became accepted church practice” (Ibid. p. 90).

62

From the Church Fathers• “…we do not commune infants…since children are not able to

examine themselves and, thus, cannot discern the Lord’s body…the ceremony of the baptism is sufficient for their salvation” (Augsburg and Constantinople: The Correspondence Between the Tubingen Theologians and Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople on the Augsburg Confession. p. 143)

• It is clear that one cannot deal with infants through the bare preaching of repentance and remission of sins, for that requires hearing (Rom 10.17), deliberation and meditation (Ps 119), understanding (Mt 13.51) which are not found in infants. With regard to ‘Let a man examine himself’ and ‘…discern the Lord’s body…’ (this is) a thing which cannot be ascribed to infants” (Examnination of the Council of Trent, Part II. Martin Chemnitz. CPH. 1978. pp. 165-166)

63

From the Church Fathers• Where a reference to confirmation age appears, the age is rarely

higher than 12. Thus Hohenlohe, 1577, and Ansbach, 1564, specify 12. The same age is suggested by Allstedt, 1533, and Lindow in Pomerania, 1571….Lower Austria, 1571, sets a range between 10 and 15….12 or over…10 or 11… Sweden…no child younger than 9, or 8 at least… Denmark, 16th century,… 6 or 7” (Confirmation in the Lutheran Church. Arthur C. Repp. CPH. 1964. pp. 56-57)

• Also Johann Gerhard, Jacob Andreae• “It was an obvious misuse when it (communing children) was rather

generally done, from the third to the fifth centuries, and of a misunderstanding of John 6.53, which was (incorrectly) understood as referring to receiving the sacrament” (CFW Walther. Pastoral Theology. New Haven, MO. 1995. pp. 146-147).

64

What, then, is the appropriate age for first communion?

• Prior to the merger of the ALC and LCA into the ELCA in the 1980s, a study was done to address this question. The Joint Commission on Theology and Practice of Confirmation proposed six changes.– 1 The central purpose of confirmation is to help baptized the identify

with the life and mission of the adult Christian community– 2 Grade 10 is the best time for confirmation– 3 Admission to the Lord’s Supper should come before confirmation– 4 Grade 5 is the best time for admitting children to their first communion– 5 Adults should not be confirmed– 6 There should be unity among all Lutheran church bodies on the age

for confirmation and the age for first communion (Ron Heins. “The Age of Communion and Confirmation in Light of Recent Trends in Lutheranism.” 1971. p.2)

65


• Rationale– Loss and spiritual

weakness of young adults

– No common understanding of the purpose of confirmation (prepare to receive communion, renew baptismal faith, entrance into church membership)

• Luther wrote his Large and Small Catechisms so fathers could teach their children at home to– Keep their children’s

baptismal faith alive and growing

– Be able to partake of the Lord’s Supper in a worthy manner

66


• Six major emphases evolved over the years following the Reformation which affected the practice of confirmation (Ibid. p. 3)– Catechetical (16th century)– Hierarchical– Sacramental– Traditional– Pietistic (17th century)– Rationalistic (18th century)

• Luther was the prime mover behind (the catechetical approach. “Children were instructed principally in the homes and, when they were thought to be ready for communion by the parents and/or sponsors, they were brought to the church where the pastor or elders would examine the child to ascertain whether he was ready” (Ibid. p.4)

• Instruction continued after a child was accepted for communion, until age 21 or when the child was married

67


Hierarchical:Introduced by Martin Bucer, 1538Individual vowed allegiance to Christ through the churchWilling submission/vow to Christ and the church to combat criticism of the Anabaptists that infant baptism led to moral laxityConcentrated on education to prepare children for making a vow of allegiance to leading a Christian life (influence of Desiderius Erasmus).

• Sacramental– The Holy Spirit was given tgo

the catacumen through the laying on of hands; needed to complete baptism

– Confirmation conferred a fuller membership in the church not given in baptism

– The Lutheran Agenda: “Upon this your voluntary… promise …welcome you as a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church…to participate with us in all the rights and privileges…

68


• Traditional– Philipp Melanchthon and

Martin Chemnitz– Separated confirmation

from first communion– Primary concern was to

develop a purely Lutheran form of confirmation

• Some generalizations– Luther rejected the Catholic

doctrine that made confirmation a sacrament

– Formal instruction preceded confirmation and first communion

– The home was the primary agency for instruction

– The pastor’s role was to review and examine the catechumen before accepting for communion

– Confirmation was directly associated with both sacraments

69


• Pietistic– Philipp Spener shifted the

emphasis from the objective to the subjective

– He assumed that the faith, received in baptism, was weak or dying

– Emphasized a renewal of the baptismal covenant and not just remembering the baptismal covenant (Bucer)

– The age of confirmation was raised to the 14-16 year old bracket. Baptism was lowered to a status below that of confirmation

• Rationalistic– Confirmation was the ‘coming out’

event for young people– Emphasis was on the catechumen

being able to explain Christianity in a logical and plausible way

– The catechumen now achieved a level of Christian maturity that allowed full membership status

– Long, written exams were part of the curricula which required the catechumen to be a defender of the faith

– Confirmation day became ‘the most important day” in the life of the catechumen

– These emphases led to the ‘graduation syndrome’ now attached to confirmation

70


• Other by-products included:– Separate examination, confirmation, first communion– Dressing confirmands in white robes to signify purity for having

brought baptism to completion– Home dinners, a gathering of the clan to congratulate the

confirmand for having achieved full membership into the church and the adult world

“If confirmation is to be defined as a period of instruction to prepare a Christian for the reception of the Lord’s Supper, then age will be determined by the scriptural guidelines for reception of this sacrament. Then the only question is at what age a person is able to discern the Lord’s body and blood, examine him/herself and be able to distinguish truth from untruth. This has been…in the range of 9-14 years of age” (Ibid. p. 6).

71


• An interesting observation by Pastor Heins:• “They (the tri-church commission) have reasoned…that youth today

must be educated in the doctrines of the Scripture more thoroughly than ever before. This is due to the lack of Bible training in the home, the pressures of science and the evil of our age…they have proposed that confirmation be moved from the 8th grade to the 10th grade…Are we asking too much of a young person before allowing him to go to communion? If a young person can correctly examine himself and rightly discern the true body and blood of our Lord in the sacrament, have we any right to keep him from it for such a long period of time? Furthermore, if confirmation is simply an instructing and strengthening in the Word of God, does it bear any connection with baptism and the Lord’s Supper? If not, then there is no reason why confirmation and entrance to the Lord’s Supper cannot be separated; the one moved up and the other moved back” (Ibid. p. 7)

72

Baptism/Confirmation• It needs to be stated clearly that neither confirmation nor

first communion are to be regarded as necessary acts of completion due to the unfinished or incomplete rite of baptism. In the Sacrament of Holy Baptism the Lord adopts the baptized infant into his family of believers and a new man of faith is born (Rom 6.4)– It is a rebirth (Titus 3.5) without sin– It gives the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2.38; 22.16)– It saves (Mk 16.16; 1 Pet 3.2)– It is the initiate rite into the church (1 Cor 12.13)

The baptized infant is a believer, is not being starved or deprived of the forgiveness of sins and is lacking nothing necessary for salvation.

73


• The tri-commission report supports ago 10/the fifth grade as the appropriate for first communion based on educational findings of the day (1971) which characterize this age group in this way:

– Happy to be what he is– Friendly– Agreeable/amenable/cooperative– Sincere/poised/unselfconscious– Easy-going– Quick to admit his errors– Likes to assimilate facts and memorize– Has acquired time concepts needed for the study of history– Capable of appreciating the historic facts on which the Christian faith and

celebration are based– More aware of what is wrong than what is right and therefore needs to make

ethical decisions in the face of his impulses– Attendance at the Lord’s Supper would offer help in these areas– Dr Repp proposes age 12 for confirmation “because the children are not yet into

the problems of puberty but still under a stronger influence from home than those two years later” (Ibid. p. 9)

74


• DO YOU AGREE WITH THESE 1971 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS IN LIGHT OF:

– SEXTING– THE INTERNET– SINGLE-PARENTING– HIGHER DIVORCE RATE– “HOOKING UP” IN THE GRADE SCHOOL– A MORE MATURE CHILD TODAY– AN AVERSION TO MEMORIZATION– LIFE EXPERIENCES (DISNEY) THAT MAKE IT MORE CHALLENGING TO

KEEP YOUTH INTERESTED– THE ADULT DESIRE TO SEE THEIR CHILD “GROW UP” TOO QUICKLY– THE BUSY LIFE OF PARENTS THAT OFFERS LITTLE TIME-SUPPORT IN

THE HOME FOR CATECHISM INSTRUCTION– ADULT APATHY TOWARD SPIRITUAL GROWTH FOR THEMSELVES OR

THEIR CHILDREN– ET AL.

75

Questions Re Offering First Communion at an Earlier Age

• 1 At what age do children have a proper appreciation, understanding and sense of awe of the Lord’s Supper?

• 2 At what age are children able to engage in a serious self-examination?• 3 At what age do children understand and, under the influence of faith, consciously

strive to amend their sinful life and use the Lord’s Supper to aid them in doing that?• 4 Since children are members of the Church through the rite of baptism, and since

children are hearing and applying God’s Word which comes to them through the sermon/children’s sermon, LES, SS and family devotions, would a “rush to communion” trivialize the power and effectiveness of the Word that is preached and taught?

• 5 Will the practice be reintroduced from Luther’s time when each child is evaluated as to readiness for receiving the Lord’s Supper, which will mean that some are accepted and others are not accepted…perhaps much to the dismay of the subjective appraisal of parents?

• 6 When families transfer from one congregation to another that has not lowered the age of first communion and have a child who has been receiving the Lord’s Supper, will this create issues that disrupt the peace and unity within the church?

• 7 At Atonement, several of our parents bring their children with them to the Lord’s Table. As these children observe and listen to what I’m doing and saying, is this laying the groundwork for them to receive the sacrament at an earlier age?

76

Bibliography• Albrecht, Martin. Baptism, Confirmation and First Communion. WLS essays• Berg, Peter. I Believe in the Communion of All the Saints. Part One. And Part Two• Brenner, John. A Brief Study of Confirmation: Historical Development, Theological

Considerations, and Practical Implications. Metro Conference. 1996.• Can Children Properly Receive the Lord’s Supper in WELS Congregations. White

paper. WELS Commission on Youth Discipleship• Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) of the LC-MS. Response to

‘Concerns of South Wisconsin District Circuits 18 and 19 Regarding Infant Communion. 1996

• Communion of Children.Catholic Encyclopedia: Communion of Children• Cyberstones – A Lutheran Blog.http://redeemer-fortwayne.org• Das, Andrew. Baptized. NPH. Milwaukee. 1991.• Eickmann, Paul & Uhlhorn, Ronald. Confirmation Instructions for the Mentally

Retarded. Presented to the pastoral conference of the Western WI District. 1979• First Confession Before First Communioin: Settled or Unsettling?

www.paulturner.org/confession

77

Bibliography, cont.• Fredrich, Prof. Joel. The Lord Jesus Institutes Holy Communion. A symposium on

Holy Communion, WLS. 2003.• Frey, James A. A Good Mother Feeds Her Children.• Frey, James A. Infant Communion. www.motleymagpie.org• Gehlbach, Gary. The Discontinuance of the Practice of Communion Infants in the

Western Church. 1996. www.sharontelephone.com/~gehlbach/IC/Papers/infant• Hartmann, Frederick. Thoughts on Communion Before Baptism (Episcopalian).• Heins, Ronald. The Age of Communion and Confirmation. Dakota/Montana District

Pastoral Conference.1971• Infant Communion.www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_communion• Infant Communion. Communion of Baptized Infants. Ev Catholic Church.

www.members.aol.com/Kugala• Infant Communiion?Then What is Communiion? Or Baptism?

www.crossings.org/archive/bob/infant_communion• Infant Communion. Committee to Investigate the Situatin at Westminister Seminary in

Regard to Infant Communion. www.rcus.org/main/pdfs/infant.pdg• Kuske, David. Expanding the Nurture of High School Age Youth.www.wlsessays.net• Lee, Tommy. The History of Paedocommunion: From the Early Church Until

1500.www.reformed.org/sacramentology/tl_paedo

http://www.motleymagpie.org/

http://www.members.aol.com/Kugala

http://www.crossings.org/archive/bob/infant_communion

78

Bibliography, cont.• Lee, Francis Nigel. Calvin Versus Child Communion. Why all true

Calvinists must reject the eucharizing of uncatechized pre-adolescent covenant children. Queensland Presbyterian Theological Seminary. Australia. 2004.

• Lockwood, Gregory. 1 Corinthians. Abuses at the Communal Meal. 1 Corinthians 11.17-22. pp 380 – 410.CPH. St. Louis. 2000.

• Lutheran Voices on the Theology and Practice of Infant Communion. www.geocities.com/resourcesforlutyherans/communionage

• Micheel, Jonathan. The Church Offers Holy Communion. Symposium on Holy Communion. WLS. 2003

• Musculus, Wolfgang. The Validity of Children at the Lord’s Table in the Words of an Early Reformed Theologian. www.paedocommunion.com/articles/musculus_common_places.php

• Paedo-Communion. www.stlukesrec.org/sermons/2epi01

http://www.stlukesrec.org/sermons/2epi01

79

Bibliography, cont.• Papenhausen, Donna.Jesus Loves Me: The Young Child and

Communion.Google search for “Infant Communion”• Proposed Presbytery In these Statement on Paedo-communion.

The Presbytery of the Mississippi Valley (anti)• Report of the Ad-Interim Committee to Study the Question of

Paedocommunioin. Presbyterian Church of America. 2003• Sacramentum Defensum. 1 Corinthians.

http://postdeliberatuslux.wordpress.com• Schuetze, Prof. John. Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary class lecture

notes. 2009 • Schwertley, Brian. Paedocommunion: A Biblical Examination.

www.entrewave.com/view/reformedonline/paedocommunion• Stone, Scott. Our Confirmation Practice. WLS essays online.

http://postdeliberatuslux.wordpress.com/

80

Bibliography, cont.• Strawbridge, Gregg. Eucharist Participants in the Early Centuries:

biblical and Historical Evidence for Paedocommunion. [email protected]

• Theology and Practice of The Lord’s Supper. A Report of the Commussion on Theology and Church Relations of the LC-MS. May 1983.

• Tranvik, Mark. Should Infants Be Communed? A Lutheran Perspective. Word & World, Volume XV, Number 1. Winter 1995

• Vogts, Kevin. Are There Theological Differences…Holy Communion. www.confessionallutherans.org/papers/vogts

• Warnke, Harold. The Ways of our Fathers as to the Age of Communicants. Northern WI District Pastoral Conference. 1971.

• Werner, James E. Confirmation: Is Eighth Grade the Right Age? Central Wisconsin Teachers’ Conference, WW District. 1987. WLS essays

• What is Paedocommunion? http://paedocommunion.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.confessionallutherans.org/papers/vogts

Documents

What Is The Appropriate Age For Receiving First Communion?