Children at the Lord's table:
a Reformed dilemma
George M. Marsden
In most Reformed churches it has been customary to
baptize infants but to reserve the other sacrament, the
Lord's supper, for adults (or "young adults"). Profes-
sion of faith has been prerequisite to participation in
the supper or becoming a "communicant member" of
the church. Such practices reflect an old Reformation
dilemma. Justification by grace through faith seems to
imply a believers' church made up of those who pro-
fess faith. Infant baptism, however, seems to imply
that children are truly members of the church long
before they can profess their faith.
The Synod of the Reformed Church in America
this, summer sent to its churches for study a report
from its Theological Commission recommending that
the denomination revise the usual practice and allow
baptized children old enough to understand the mean-
ing of the sacrament to partake of the Lord's supper.
The argument is that such an arrangement would be
taking baptism more seriously as a genuine means of
grace which is a sign and a seal of a real covenant,
rather than presuming (as is currently often done) that
a baptized child has no practical standing in the church
until he or she makes adult profession of faith. Fur-
thermore children could benefit from the grace con-
veyed through the Lord's Supper. A full-fledged pub-
lic profession of faith would be reserved until early
adulthood, thus underscoring the recognition that
children are members, even communicant members,
of the church prior to such adult commitment.
A s with so many other questions that have agitated
the church over the years, these issues are not im-
mediately settled on the basis of simple faithfulness
either to Scripture or to tradition. If one thing is clear in
the New Testament institution of the sacraments it is
that no very specific rules are prescribed for their cele-
bration. This state of affairs is especially striking when
we compare the New Testament to the Old Testament
where we find ceremonial procedures spelled out in
strict detail. For reasons that we can only guess at, the
New Testament left such matters to the discretion of
the church. Such being the case, it seems possible, and
George Marsden teaches history at Calvin College. He is a standings of Scripture and proper church practice. Ac-
graduate of Westminster Theological Seminary. We ap- cording to the RCA report there are at least two specific
preciate his willingness to evaluate this report for our readers liabilities of the present practice. First, denying the
and welcome your responses on this as well as other issues. supper to children of believers betrays an implicit as-
The Reformed Journal
perhaps likely, that a number of procedures concern-
ing the sacraments (as well as understandings of them)
are consistent with Scripture and therefore legitimate.
The appeal to Scripture then is not likely to eliminate
any but the more extreme proposals as to how the
sacraments are to be celebrated.
Church tradition is hardly more helpful. The ques-
tion of the age for baptism has, of course, been the
most divisive, with both sides being able to make
plausible claims to represent the most ancient tra-
ditions of the church. The issue of the age for celebra-
tion of the Lord's supper, although seldom a source for
schism, has brought probably even a wider variety of
practices. The Eastern Orthodox Churches spoon the
elements to infants; the Roman Catholics delay to
about age six; John Calvin thought age ten appro-
priate, but required a rigorous examination in the faith.
Other churches wait until around 12, 14, 16, or 18,
varying in the rigor of the examination required. Some
churches that will not baptize infants in effect accom-
plish much the same thing by having the Lord's table
open to them. Some Protestants in Scottish and Puri-
tan traditions have fenced the table so thoroughly that
even the pious often feared to take communion at all.
Some extreme groups do without the rites altogether.
Tradition, then, will not readily settle the issue unless
we consider (as most people in practice do) to be sa-
cred tradition anything that has been done in our own
immediate circle for the past fifty years.
The issue then does not appear to be very readily
settled either by appeal to chapter and verse, or by
looking up what Calvin did, or by seeking the opinion
of Grandmother Vander Baltz. Rather on questions
such as this we will have to use a more general stan-
dard, which we can describe in terms of the question:
how well do the various options comport with Scrip-
ture and the best of tradition as we understand it? Or
to put it another way: how well do the options fit with
the church's best understandings of Scripture?
Since the burden of proof usually rests on those who
desire change, we can ask first what aspects of the
present practice might not fit well the best under-
19
CURRENT PRACTICE ENCOURAGES OLDER CHILDREN
TO THINK OF "JOINING THE CHURCH"
AS THOUGH THEY HAD NEVER BEEN MEMBERS.
sumption that we regard them as unregenerate, really
having a status no different from those of the children
of the heathen. This presumption, it is argued, depre-
ciates baptism, giving it little real meaning.
By contrast, the creeds of the church, reflecting
biblical language, attribute considerable significance to
baptism. The Heidelberg Catechism, for instance, says:
"since both redemption from sin through the blood of
Christ and the gift of faith from the Holy Spirit are
promised to these children no less than to their par-
ents, infants are also by Baptism, as a sign of the cov-
enant, to be incorporated into the Christian church
and distinguished from the children of unbelievers."
Infants are here regarded as members of the church
who are presumed to receive redemption from sin and
the gift of faith. Baptism is not the cause of these pre-
sumptions, but is an appropriate sign based on these
presumptions. According to the report, the current
practice forgets these presumptions and encourages
older children of the church to think in terms of "join-
ing the church" as though they never had been mem-
bers. This practice the report attributes to pietism and
revivalism, which encouraged the idea that "children
of the church needed to be converted in the same
manner as those outside the church."
A second objection to the current practice is that it
denies the means of grace to members of the body of
Christ who need it. The Lord's supper is an important
means for nurturing those who are presumed to be "in
Christ." The church embraces not just individuals, but
families, who may properly celebrate together the ben-
efits of the covenant and of Christ's redeeming work.
If we grant for the moment that each of these ar-
guments appears to have some weight, we can turn to
the other side of the question: are there aspects of the
proposed changes that do not comport well with the
church's best understanding of Scripture? Here also,
two arguments seem particularly relevant. One is that
it would encourage children to run the risk, stated by
Paul in 1 Corinthians 11, that "anyone who eats and
drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks
judgment to himself." The second argument is that
permitting children at the Lord's table might encour-
age the abandonment of requiring an adult profession
of faith for those who grew up in the church as cove-
nant children.
In answer to the first objection the RCA's Theolog-
ical Commission observes that Paul's words cannot
reasonably be interpreted as intending to disqualify
"anyone who believes in or loves the Saviour and
20
trusts in him alone for salvation." "Discerning the
body" seems in the passage to be meant as the oppo-
site of partaking of the elements "in an unworthy
manner." The "discerning" does not seem to be requir-
ing a high level of intelligence. If intelligence were
made the issue the rule might "easily endanger the
right of older 'little ones' to come to the table." The
discernment involved should be at a level appropriate
to a person's age and capacities. All that can rea-
sonably be required from the text is that there be "a
faith in and a love for the Saviour, ability to under-
stand the essential meaning of the symbolism of the
table, and the knowledge that he belongs to the cove-
nant community."
Those who raise the objection based on 1 Corin-
thians 11 might continue to argue, however, that open-
ing the table to those of an early age would endanger
the children, since they would be liable to partake of
the elements lightly and thus drink damnation to
themselves. This objection cannot be easily sidestepped,
and those who open the table to children should keep
this danger in mind. However, it should also be pointed
out that the risks involved in partaking of the Lord's
supper are not unique to it. The biblical warnings
against those who hear the proclamation of the word of
the Lord and yet take it lightly or reject it are at
least as severe as the precaution concerning the Lord's
supper. The history of Israel illustrates this point re-
peatedly. The principle involved seems to be that
every means of grace carries with it the potential of
being a means of judgment to those who abuse it. The
problem of children and young persons in the church
is then a much broader one than just that concerning
the Lord's supper. In fact a case can be made that
opening the table to children might help resolve the
general problem of childhood irreverence in services,
since it would involve their participation in a means of
grace that they might appreciate more readily than
they do most preaching. (This line of thought would
point toward weekly celebration as well.)
T h e other major issues involve the relationship of pro-
fession of faith to communicant status. Traditionally,
these have been closely related; the Commission takes
the position that they are better separated. This raises a
question first regarding the Commission's specific
proposals for admission of children to the table. In
their general argumentation they observe that among
the few requirements for participation should be "a
faith and a love for the Saviour" appropriate to one's
The Reformed Journal
THE LORD'S SUPPER IS A MEANS OF GRACE
FROM WHICH COVENANT CHILDREN
WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH WOULD BENEFIT.
age and understanding. In their specific recom-
mendations, however, they propose that "the decision
to come to the Table should be arrived at between par-
ent and child in fulfillment of the vows taken at the
time of the child's baptism." The parents then would
request of the elders that the child be allowed to par-
ticipate. The elders in turn "should seek assurance
from the parents that the child has an essential under-
standing of the sacrament and is ready for a meaning-
ful participation." Fulfilment of the baptismal vows
would involve teaching the child to "grow in the way
of faith," and being "ready for a meaningful participa-
tion" might imply faith on the part of the child. It
seems odd, however, that the committee which itself
suggests "faith and love for the Saviour" as a general
requirement does not recommend in its specific pro-
posal the inquiry as to whether the child has such faith
and love. Adding to the recommendation that at least
the parents should keep this requirement of a child's
"faith and love for the Saviour" centrally in mind
would seem consistent with the rest of the proposal.
More crucial is the fear that having children com-
municants might encourage abandonment of a profes-
sion of faith altogether for those who grow up in the
church. One might construe sentiments in this direc-
tion in the committee's observation that "the idea that
the children of the church need to be converted in the
same manner as those outside the church" was a
product of revivalism. This position is characterized as
"a new conversionist, individualistic theology," which
jeopardizes the meaningfulness of the covenant.
Their emphasis here, however, is apparently on
the abuses of conversionist theology. This becomes
clear when we consider the Commission's own pro-
posal to meet this objection. Clearly they are not op-
posed to conversion of covenant children if by conver-
sion is meant something like the conscious response of
the individual to the regenerating grace of God. Such a
conversion need not, of course, be a sudden or dra-
matic experience; it may be the product of Christian
nurture and a gradual process. It could be dramatic as
well. In either case it is one of the very things that
should be expected to result from the covenant and
adoption into the family of God, which baptism sig-
nifies and seals.
Although not using the term "conversion" in this
sense, the Commission recognizes the crucial impor-
tance of some such commitment in its proposals. Spe-
cifically they answer the objection that children's
communion would undermine public profession by
The Reformed Journal
recommending that those who have been participating
in the supper "be required to stand before the church
and deliberately and publicly affirm in their own per-
sons the reality of God's grace in their lives and to
confirm the vows signified in baptism."
This seems like an excellent solution to this aspect
of the question. Even if some affirmation of a childlike
faith were required of children before taking commu-
nion, the commitment would be in áome important
respects different from one made later in life, since
until a certain age a child is not fully his own person
but properly dependent to some extent on the ideas
and commitments of his or her parents. Further, be-
cause of the radical character of the Christian faith, it
seems reasonable for the church to require its adult
members at some time to make an adult public declara-
tion of faith. Certainly such a practice fits well both
with Scripture and the best traditions of the church.
The committee points out that since partaking of
the Lord's supper is not contingent on adult profession
of faith this "Affirmation of the Baptismal Covenant"
could be postponed to a later age than is done in most
churches. This would avoid the problem, common
both in Reformed and Baptist traditions, of those who
made profession in adolescence observing later that "I
didn't know what I was doing at the time," or "I really
wasn't ready." Furthermore this affirmation would be
coupled with a "Commissioning for Service." In con-
nection with the "self-conscious commitment to
Christ" involved in the Affirmation of the Baptismal
Covenant the persons would also be committed to be
"set apart as Christ's servants in the world." This
commissioning would be a reminder that life in Christ
involves "commitment to go out and serve him as
faithful disciples."
Although these acts are to be preceded by consid-
erable training in the meaning of the faith, theology,
and the requirements of true commitment, and will
result in voting privileges, they will not be considered
in any way as "joining the church." Rather, the affir-
mations will be of the work already fully symbolized
and sealed in baptism. Baptism, then, even for the
covenant child would be pointed to as the sacrament of
entry into the body of Christ.
Weighing the two sides of the issue, I think the pro-
posals by the Commission of the RCA seem com-
mendable. The strongest argument for changing the
present practice is that the Lord's supper is a means of
grace from which covenant children who are members
21
of the church would benefit. There seems to be little
argument against such a practice so long as there are
evidences of appropriate degrees of faith and discern-
ment. The arguments based on the meaning of bap-
tism, even though good ones, are more open to
counter-argument simply because there is not much
agreement in the church as to what is presumed re-
garding the status and spiritual condition of baptized
children. Nonetheless, the Commission's strong in-
terpretation of the meaning of baptism and reaffirma-
tion of that meaning by the baptized person in adult-
hood fits very well with Scripture and certainly could
be a means of strengthening the Reformed under-
standing of the significance of the sacrament.
Most notably, the report takes a step toward re-
When Christians and Marxists
(try to) get together
Edward E. Ericson, Jr.
Christianity and Marxism are the two most important
belief systems in the modern world. One has been
around for a long time; the other is a relative
newcomer—and, further, is in its own curious way an
offshoot of the former. The greatest issues of our day
inevitably involve the clash of these two great "ideas,"
even when the particular branch issues seem quite far
removed from what I am convinced are the two root
matters.
This has been perceived—however inchoately—
by Solzhenitsyn and many other Soviet dissidents
when rejection of Marxism has propelled them into the
arms of the Christian faith. That magnificent man-
ifesto From Under the Rubble is the best and most mov-
ing testimony to this point. There are only so many
views of human nature and the meaning of life on the
market, and of them all the most compelling and per-
suasive are Christianity and Marxism. They virtually
divide up the world today along the lines of such basic
questions as the following: Is man capable of handling
his destiny autonomously, or is man dependent on
God? Is man morally free, or is he determined by some
historical or other necessity? Is man a creature with an not in Africa but in Europe.
eternal destiny in view, or is he the highest form of
animal life present on this planet with no destiny other
than terrestrial?
Edward E. Ericson, Jr., is professor of English at Calvin of man and society and that upstart bastard offspring,
College.
22
solving a long-standing dilemma in the Reformed
community. It not only has given the pietist tradition
its due, but has in fact strengthened the church's em-
phasis on adult profession and commitment. Christian
nurture both in the home and in the church, including
the nurture of the Lord's table, build for such commit-
ment. On the other hand, by making sense of the rela-
tionship between infant baptism and faith it not only
helps avoid the embarrassment of having to become
Baptists, but actually strengthens the Reformed under-
standing of the significance of the sacrament. No
doubt some important considerations are neglected
both in the proposal and in this response, but the steps
proposed seem to be in the right direction.
All of this is to say that we have witnessed in our
century the Westernization of the whole world. There
are, of course, other belief systems extant, some
non-Western. We could name Islam, Hinduism,
Buddhism, animism, and the like. But these "ideas"
simply do not set the agenda for modern men as do
Christianity and Marxism and the concepts which have
grown historically out of them. For instance, China,
where a quarter of the world's people live, seeks to
find its own way to implement an idea of man and
society imported from the West, namely, Marxism. In-
dia, where an eighth of the world's people live, runs
an election in which the basic issues revolve around
how to implement the concept of a democratic society,
another import from the West. Japan, the two Koreas,
the Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh,
Thailand, Malaysia, the Indochinese states (we are
now to a clear majority of the world's population and
haven't yet gotten to the West)—all wrestle with the
problem of how to handle ideas about human society
which were nurtured in the West. Every African state
wrestles with ideas of man and government spawned
The simplistic distinction between East and West
which is a staple of the Western (and world) press is
spurious. The real, the big issues of the world today
are between West and West, between that Christianity
which has long nurtured Westerners' understandings
Marxism, which ends up virtually turning its parent
The Reformed Journal
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.