Should Children Attend Communion?
May 3rd, 2007 by spk
Should children be present in the communion service? This was a question recently on MInTheGap’s weblog. It is also a question I have come across before regarding practices in churches where infant baptism is practiced. The question is asked, “if baptism is the mark of a Christian, what right do we have to refuse communion to children?”
As I understand it, membership of the Christian Church is through
baptism. This is, I think, a subtlety that is important to protestant congregations that practice infant baptism. Because those who believe in baptising children too young to answer for
themselves, do so on the belief that there is some special benefit of
so being a part of the Church, whilst not actually a believer. c.f. 1
Cor 7:14 (which is talking about marriage partners, but it perhaps
conveys the same idea).
Now if this accepted, then it follows that when one comes to faith,
the promises made for them at baptism are now owned by them. Their
membership of the church is confirmed in some sense by their faith.
On the other hand, those of us who hold to believers baptism say that faith should precede the baptism, and the baptism itself is the symbolic or sacramental enactment of our new birth. But even so, we can still hold to a view that the children present in our church are in a priveleged position, benefiting from teaching and nurture and the love of our community. Churches that practice believer’s baptism usually have some kind of dedication ceremony symbolising the special responsibility of the church to that child.
Now communion is a feast for the believer, and only for them. If
people are baptised into the Church, and properly instructed as to the
purpose and meaning of communion, then the act of taking communion
itself is a declaration of faith. Thus, someone who might say that the
eucharist defines the church is quite right. The true Church, the body
of baptised believers is self defined by the very act of taking communion.
This being so, it seems to me that any age limit applied by us on the
taking of communion simply says that we do not believe anyone under
that age can be a true believer, or sufficiently capable of making a
declaration of faith.
Now we might argue that this is so, but I wonder how this differs from
the argument that is thrown against “believer’s baptism”, which
argues that very young children are either unjustly denied baptism, or
else the believers baptism is virtually infant baptism in any case.
One minister I spoke to recently suggested we don’t *baptise* the children until they are eight, but this still suggests we do not believe the statement of faith of a
seven year old, if they should make one.
It is all something of a knotty issue, but I think the key issues are
flexibility, a good understanding of grace, and the ability to believe
the testimony of young children, without falling into gullibility.
But one thing is clear: if we don’t allow children at the communion table – if we just ship them off to their own age specific activities – then we are making a statement that these people are *not* believers.
The solution, as practiced in many churches, is to allow children to take part in the communion service but suggest that they receive a special prayer rather than the bread and the wine.
Now in churches with believer’s baptism, we have a good date for when they first take communion – at the first opportunity after their baptism. Churches that have infant baptism, or believer’s baptism only after a certain age have a thornier problem. But if children are really to benefit from the worship of a communion service, and if they are to understand how deeply we feel about Christ’s sacrifice, and the glorious hope that we will one day drink from the fruit of the vine with Christ in His Father’s kingdom, then however we deal with this issue, we are wrong to take them out of the service altogether.
Great question, here’s what I think. Children should not take communion till they’re saved. If they are saved at a very young age, say 2, then they should not take communion till they are old enough to understand what it’s all about. It’s a very serious occasion. Our two daughters do take communion, they are 9 and 6. We take the time beforehand to talk over how important it is that they take it with the right heart, and explain why we’re doing it, then pray together. My 9 year old decided she wasn’t “ready” for it this past Sunday. So we let her sit it out this time.
I love that there is an age of accountability…we can know that our children under a certain age (variable) will go to Heaven if they die w/o having accepted God’s salvation gift. But I do feel that until they really seem to understand the gravity of communion they shouldn’t partake of it. It’s got to be more than a snack at church.
Boy, Stephen, you’re almost jumping on an upcoming post I want to write talking about Baptism!
I think you have valid points– we shouldn’t deny children the ability to be in the service to see what is about, and baptism is a good time to delineate when a person is eligible for participating. Like Mary said, there also has to be some training as to the seriousness of the time. Since I haven’t heard of anyone linking a death to partaking in a wrong way in quite a while, the admonitions may not carry as much weight.
Thanks for this!
Mary, thanks for your comments. I don’t think, however, that we need exclude children from the communion service if they are not saved, as we can pray for them, and they can observe the practice and understand what we are doing, even if they have not accepted Christ as saviour.
Min, sorry for stealing your thunder
Training/teaching would be good (for adults too perhaps). I think the admonitions of scripture are serious, but for serious breaches. A pastor I know tells me he had to nce refuse communion to someone because he was in an adulterous relationship, and the pastor knew that God was saying to him that if he accepted communion he would drink judgement on himself. (This was a pentecostal pastor – he believed God revealed this to him very specifically. As I know nothing of the case other than his testimony to it, you can take it as you will, but it seems to me that this is the kind of situation that the scriptures would apply to).
Thanks for the comments.
It’s interesting to me that churches that practice believer’s baptism have a ceremony called infant dedication, and churches that practice infant baptism have a ceremony called confirmation. It seems that we all understand the need to include children in some sense from the earliest ages, and yet there is a point at which we all understand that a person needs to make their own choice once they come to their own understanding of what salvation entails.
(Yes, I used the colloquial singular “they.” It’s the best solution to the stupid indefinite gender conundrum.)
So based on that, I think taking communion should be for those who have been baptized/confirmed. Oddly enough, most churches that have confirmation do make it a prerequisite to communion, while many churches that practice believer’s baptism don’t make baptism a prerequisite–so it appears that confirmation tends to be taken more seriously than baptism, respectively.
I don’t much like the idea of specific age requirements; I think that the person should be able to articulate a credible profession of faith. That will be at different ages for different children.
Hi Keith,
I think the “colloquial singular ‘they’” is fine. I use it all the time, and it has been in use in English since the days of Chaucer. Much better than the alternatives.
Thanks for your thoughts. I agree with what you say.
Regards,
Stephen
I agree, we shouldn’t leave them out, unless you mean letting them actually participate in the partaking of the bread and drink. I like the idea of waiting till they’ve been baptized, neither of ours have been baptized yet. Oldest is in baptism classes though, and we’ve had an interesting conversation recently as regards her testimony. She knows she’s a Christian, but she doesn’t remember the actual salvation experience which bothers her. She was just under three when she came and found me, and asked me to “help” her pray for salvation. She was incredibly advanced and understood it all, I wasn’t pushing her into anything.
I did the same thing as a toddler, my mom told me about it, but since I didn’t remember it, I continually felt doubt about my salvation. I always feel that I was really saved when I turned 7 and “re-committed” my heart and life to Christ.
Its great to hear about your little girl, Mary. Thanks for your comments.
First, I believe a child is saved regardless of baptism or not until the age of accountability.
Once they are at the age of accountability, then they should either know or learn what the reason is for being baptized, once they know, then they should be baptized, After that, I believe they need to understand the purpose of communion and then I believe they should be allowed to participate in it. But not until these qualifications are met. This not only goes for children, But for adults too, And I agree with not allowing someone to take it knowing that open everyday sin is in there lives.
Do you feel that they should be allowed to be upfront when the deacons and elders are preparing for communion? We are having an issue about this.
Even in the Old Testament times the children were taught about the Passover meal, and were allowed to take it. They were taught from generation to generation what is was and why they did it. I think children should be taught by their parents as to why we take it, and to help them understand through out Lord Jesus. It was Jesus who said Let the little children come to me. We need to quit getting so religious about it and start asking Jesus to help us with our concerns.
Amen Calley!! When we get “religion” out of the church and simply embrace Jesus with child like faith and let Him manifest His life in us & through us then we will begin to see the church as the Lord intended it.
I too believe that children should be allowed to commune. Some churches allow them to commune first, and prior to them partaking, have a teaching session of a few minutes, on a child’s level of understanding. Do they not learn by example. Satan will teach them and allow them to partake of sinful actions, no matter what age. So where is our wisdom here? Lost? Jesus did day, Suffer the little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Is not partaking of communion “a coming unto Jesus?” For the sake of peace, I quietly disagree with the practice to refuse children communion. But it truly disturbs my spirit.
In the bible, didn’t the first century Christians break the bread/body and drink the wine and a dinner setting? Paul admonished those who ate more while others went hungry and also admonished those that got drunk! It doesn’t mention whether or not children were present, but I’d find it hard that at this meeting of the church body that everyone left their kids at home!… so would they have denied their children at least some bread to eat?
I realise now how the religious society of friends has so much time to discuss issues that affect us outside of the meeting for worship! I was baptised into the anglican church – because my mother was (all the rest of my family her parents included were non conformists of a wide variety). But that is a far as it goes. I’ve attended anglican chuches and catholic mass (where I have received blessings). It is interesting to read the thoughts/debates. I often wonder about the difference between anglican – confirmation then first communian – and (westen) catholicism – first communion then confirmation….