As we near February, we come to our church’s annual offering of the Communicant’s Class. This roughly twelve week class introduces and reviews the fundamentals of the faith to our covenant children with the goal of both nurturing them in making a profession of faith and preparing them to covenant with the church (PCA BCO 6-1, 28-3).
In conjunction with this I’m frequently asked by parents when their children can either take the class or begin to receive communion. The short answer is that our Session as a matter of practice will not consider receiving a child into communing membership until the age of 13. As the teacher of the class, I typically allow students who are 11-12 year old to participate in preparation for the time when they become eligible. There’s the short answer. But you probably want more than the short answer – I hope you do. So here’s the longer answer.
Often times a parent will mention something like, “My daughter is six and she put her trust in Jesus a few weeks ago when I was putting her to bed. Shouldn’t she go to the class?” First, that’s wonderful to hear and a reason for a parent to rejoice. At the same time, as her pastor, I wouldn’t yet encourage her towards communing membership. So when should she come? Ultimately that’s a pastoral and sessional question specific to each particular person but there are several principles which inform our policy and practice at WRPC. Some are theological, some are historical, some are constitutional, and some are prudential. These are what you might call “governing principles” in our doctrine and practice. I don’t present them as a full defense of our doctrine and practice (that’s a book length answer), but as a few pieces of knowledge that can give you insight into why the bar is set in the place that it is.
Theological Issues: Many have supposed that since Presbyterians administer children the rite of baptism, how can they withhold the sacrament of communion? Our children are already members of the church as their birthright as a holy member of a believing family. They do have special care and privilege in the church. But that place doesn’t admit them to every aspect of church life. As covenant children they are immediately eligible and obligated to receive the sign of baptism, publicly marking them out from the world as separated to God. But they’re not admitted to the Lord’s Table as “communing members.” The reason lies in the fundamental distinctions between the two sacraments. Baptism is passive and objective. You don’t baptize yourself; it’s done to you, picturing the work of the Holy Spirit who comes down upon the believer (Jn 1:32, Acts 2:2-4). Baptism is also an objective status symbol in a the truest meaning of that phrase. The baptized is declared a member of the covenant community just as in the Old Testament circumcision (Gen 17:9-14) marked out as holy those belonging to the community whether or not they professed faith (Acts 2:38-39, 1 Cor 7:14). The Lord’s supper is decidedly different in its mode and meaning. The Lord’s Supper is an active and subjective event. To participate you must do something for yourself, “Take, eat…drink from it all of you” (Mt 26:26), and you must do it in a self-referential way, “examine himself” (1 Cor 11:28). In Presbyterian circles we have historically referred to this level of membership as “covenanting” with the church (PCA BCO 5-9.i.3, 38-4, 58-6). And the Lord’s Supper is an expression of that covenant making. Recognizing those distinctions between the two sacraments reveals an obvious difference in what is required and who should participate in each. Christ provides for the spiritual good of both, but the Lord’s Supper requires the participant’s mind to be rightly engaged when participating in it.
Historical Issues: Beyond the theological distinctions, the Bible also indicates biblical patterns for communion. The first is the parallel between the celebration of Passover and the Lord’s Supper. Both are rituals of eating, symbolic of the wrath satisfying bloody sacrifice needed to provide for life. While there is some debate on who participated in the Old Testament covenant meal, it seems most likely that in the annual ritual (not the initial) the participation was limited to males of an age of understanding at the annual celebration (Ex 12:24-27, 23:17, 34:23, Dt 16:5-6, 16). This seems to be confirmed by the account of Jesus coming to the Temple for the Passover celebration at the age of 12 (Luke 2:41-50). In all likelihood He was being presented in preparation for his participation the following year at the age of 13, just as in the modern-day version of the Bar Mitzvah (Aramaic/Hebrew – “Son of Commandment/Law”). Since ancient times this has been the age at which a Jewish boy is counted a man, becoming subject to the law and gaining the ability to swear an oath, own property, and be married. The facts revealed in Scripture about the “who” and “when” of the passover might be debatable but the evidence clearly points in that direction of being older rather than younger. At the very least, the Scripture is abundantly clear that some functions are age appropriate. Note that the Levites (Num 4:3), David (2 Sam 5:4), John (the Baptizer), and Jesus (Luke 3:23) all had to wait, in spite of having divinely held appointments to their office before they could enjoy and exercise their full responsibilities.
Constitutional Issues: Something often not considered by parents eager to see their child come to the Table are the constitutional issues related to it. For one, our Confession of Faith does not allow for young child communion. Several sections of the Westminster Confession speak indirectly against the wisdom of young child communion. It speaks very directly against it in three particular chapters:
Most obviously is Ch 29, “Of the Lord’s Supper.” The opening paragraph contains the phrases: “remembrance of the sacrifice,” “true believers” “engagement in and to all duties,” and “bond and pledge.” Weighty concepts to be sure. Paragraphs 7 & 8 of the same chapter refer to “worthy receivers” versus the “ignorant and wicked”. These categories are elaborated in the Westminster Larger Catechism 168-177. It’s not only hard but impossible to disregard the maturity required in coming to the table.
Also speaking to the issue of child communion is Chapter 22:3, “Of Lawful Oaths and Vows”: “Whosoever taketh an oath ought duly to consider the weightiness of so solemn an act…” Oath taking happens in the membership vows every PCA member makes in becoming a communing member of a local church (PCA BCO 57-5). Those commitments require an inescapable amount of maturity. Imagine for instance asking a nine-year-old to answer question #5 of the vows, “Do you submit yourselves to the government and discipline of the Church, and promise to study its purity and peace?” Such a question almost begs for insincerity.
A third constitutional issue is that of discipline. Communing membership, according to our Book of Church Order and our Confession of Faith embraces with it consent and submission to church discipline. BCO 56-4.j. “When they have reached the age of discretion, they become subject to obligations of the covenant: faith, repentance and obedience,” and 57-2. “The time when young persons come to understand the Gospel cannot be precisely fixed. This must be left to the prudence of the Session, whose office it is to judge, after careful examination, the qualifications of those who apply for admission to sealing ordinances.” Communing membership means that a child becomes subject to consequence of church discipline independent of his parents. Picture these two scenarios: First, an adult sinfully, repeatedly, and unrepentantly acts out in a Sunday School class. In spite of a number of corrections he continues to interrupt, distract, and make difficult efforts to teach. I doubt very many of us have ever seen anything like this happen in a church. Church discipline by the elders would be perfectly in order. Now picture a fifth grade Sunday School class with a ten year old behaving the same way. It’s virtually guaranteed that you’ll have at least one child do this in a class of 20. But we could not imagine the elders excommunicating such a ten year old. Why not the child? If someone said, “Because they’re too young for that,” they’re making the argument for why younger children should not be admitted to the Lord’s Table. They lack maturity. And for which is that maturity more important? I think everyone would agree that the Lord’s Supper is far more significant and dangerous (1 Cor 11:30-32) in it’s spiritual import than a Sunday School class.
Prudential Issues: Finally, there are a few practical issues mentioned above that also limit how willing the elders are to receive younger members into the communing membership of the congregation. Admission to the Lord’s Table is an exercise of the keys of the kingdom (Mt 16:18-19, 18:15-20). It requires that the elders themselves are capable to discern the genuineness and the maturity of the faith of the individual candidate. That is admittedly more difficult with well-instructed and catechized children for whom orthodoxy easily rolls off their tongue (and as it should). But giving orthodox answers to theological questions is not the same as either being soundly converted or having the maturity to do self-examination as demanded by Scripture (1 Cor 11:27-32). As a young person matures, deals with broader and more intense temptations, and is confronted by their own sinfulness and responsibility before God, the questions of their faith become much less academic, and much more personal and personally revealing. So in that sense, it’s not as much a question of the divine status of the child (they may have been regenerate since the womb), but of the limitations of those who serve as elders in the church.
Hopefully, these few areas will be helpful for you as you think about these things. Our Session won’t receive a young person to communing membership who is younger than thirteen. To be clear, that is not to say the elders of the church don’t believe a child can be regenerate (saved). They absolutely believe that God does, and does frequently work early in the lives of our covenant children to bring them into the state of grace. But they understand that the Bible holds both them and the members they shepherd to a higher standard of maturity when it comes to communing membership and especially that all important aspect of communing membership – coming to the Lord’s Table.
Have you ever wondered how God can be sovereign and ordain all things that come to pass and yet man can still have a free will? How can God ordain all things – even sin – and not be the author of it? What’s the difference between God’s decretive (or secret) will and His revealed will?
Beginning in mid-April we’ll be focusing on all kinds of family-related discussions in our morning worship service. This is because we’ll come to that portion of the Letter to the Ephesians where the Apostle Paul gives Holy Spirit inspired counsel on marriage & parenting.
Paragraphs 7-10 of Chapter 1 of the WCF deal with the issue of Scripture “perspicuity” and “authority”. Paragraph 7 teaches us that some Scriptures are more difficult than others but that the basic teachings of the Word are understandable by everyone who is a believer. This is the doctrine of “perspicuity”. Paragraph 8 teaches us that God has preserved the Scriptures, ordained the translation of the Scripture for His people, and that they are authoritative for all things. Even the passages of Scripture that are hard are to interpret are to be interpreted by those that are more easily understood. Additionally, as the Scriptures are the final authority (paragraphs 9-10), no man or denomination has final say in its interpretation. How does this apply to counseling?
The first thing that strikes many visitors as they worship at WRPC is that our worship seems…well, different from the run-of-the-mill evangelical church. Our services are marked by a God-centeredness and an intensity and a seriousness that is increasingly rare. If we could sum up our goal for our worship services it would be that our services would be characterized by reverence. 
When was the last time you changed your mind? Realized that you were holding to erroneous and unbiblical ideas about parenting or baptism or eschatology or God’s sovereignty or worship or finances?
If you check the index in the back of your Trinity Hymnal (pg. 887) you will find that Isaac Watts has more hymns than anyone else in our hymnal, 36 to be exact. But the second-leading hymnwriter in our hymnal is Charles Wesley, with 21 hymns.
During the 3.5 year public ministry of Jesus, His disciples heard His teaching on prayer, especially when He taught THEM how to pray (in Matthew 6 and Luke 11). They also heard Him praying brief prayers (such as the one recorded in Matthew 11:25-26). But, it is not until the night before He goes to the Cross that we hear the full, rich prayer that we call “The High Priestly Prayer of Jesus”, found in John 17. It is, without debate, the greatest prayer ever prayed. Why do I say that ?
This Sunday evening (January 3) I will be continuing in our exposition of the Psalms. It is more than fitting that I will be expounding (explaining and applying) Psalm 128, a psalm about family blessings. Most appropriate since on Monday (January 4) Sandy and I will celebrate our 36th anniversary.