While in seminary, my area of greatest emphasis in course work was the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. I took every single class offered on that subject in my three years. I love the Sacraments and I hold them close to my heart and experience God in a very real way every time I share in these with my brothers and sisters in Christ. This Sunday will be my second time to celebrate the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper with you. The reason I want to write about it this week is because after we celebrated it together on January 8 there was some confusion expressed to me by members here at FPC about who is able to partake of the Sacrament.
The way things used to be done in the PC(USA) is that someone would be baptized as an infant but would not participate in communion until they were around twelve-years-old and could go through a Communicants Class. They would then make their profession of faith and be admitted to the table based upon that profession of faith. The Lord’s Supper was for only those who were both baptized and old enough to believe and to have a sense of what is going on in communion. This practice was based upon Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 11:28-29, “Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves.” Can a four-year-old really examine herself or discern the body? Many churches, including the Roman Catholic and many Reformed denominations, continue to follow this traditional practice.
Although I know it was at some point prior to my going to seminary in 2003, I’m not sure when exactly our understanding in the PC(USA) shifted, but according to our Book of Order it is no longer our denomination’s understanding that a communicants class is required to be admitted to the Lord’s Table. That is why we won't have a Communicants Class anymore; we will have a Confirmation Class. Some here at FPC have said that it is when Rev. Charlotte O’Neill was here that the change was introduced. If that is the case, let me assure you that it wasn’t something she came up with just to mess with you. She was merely encouraging this congregation to come in line with the change that had already occurred many years earlier. Our Book of Order states “The invitation to the Lord’s Supper is extended to all who have been baptized, remembering that access to the Table is not a right conferred upon the worthy, but a privilege given to the undeserving who come in faith, repentance, and love… Baptized children who are being nurtured and instructed in the significance of the invitation to the Table and the meaning of their response are invited to receive the Lord’s Supper, recognizing that their understanding of participation will vary according to their maturity.”
In the Reformed tradition, of which the PC(USA) is a branch, the word COVENANT is of paramount importance. Our understanding is that through Jesus Christ, the Triune God made a binding COVENANT with the Church (all Christians). In Reformed writings the Church is often called the COVENANT community. When we are baptized, whether as infants or as adults, we are marked as being a part of the COVENANT community. The Lord’s Supper is, in essence, among other things a COVENANT renewal meal between us and God, as well as between those of us within the COVENANT community. That is why you have to be baptized to take communion. How can you take part in a COVENANT renewal if you are not in the COVENANT community in the first place, a community marked by baptism? This question holds for both the traditional way of understanding admittance to the Table and the newer understanding that includes baptized children.
Over time many folks in the PC(USA) began to wonder why, if baptism is the mark of inclusion in the covenant community, adult faith was being used as the determining factor in admittance to the Table. The proponents of the newer understanding said, "Whoever is baptized, whether they are 1 day old or 100 years old, is in the covenant community, right? So why can't everyone in the covenant community participate in the covenant renewal meal?" Opponents of changing our understanding cited the above passage from 1 Corinthians about being able to "discern the body" as evidence that children should not take communion. Proponents responded by asking, "Who can really discern the body? Who really understands the mystery of the Lord's Supper? Is adult faith really more trusting than childhood faith?"
Eventually, as evidenced by our Book of Order, the more open understanding won out. However, it is explicitly spelled out that the baptized child must be trained by her or his parents to have at least some understanding of what is going on. "It isn't just a snack. It is a reminder that Jesus loves us and that we love each other" and so on. Once when Wyatt was about a year old he was brought forward for communion. I didn't want to cause a scene so I went ahead and gave it to him but I was very upset because he had no idea what was going on. To me, it cheapened the Sacrament. And that was my own child! Would I, as his parent, let Wyatt take communion now? Only after some training about the Lord's Supper that I haven't done yet. With this in mind, if you would like to hold your baptized child out of Junior Church on Communion Sundays so they may partake with you as you instruct them please feel free to do that, even encouraged to do that.
Many of my pastoral colleagues in the PC(USA) have taken it a step further than our Book of Order allows for and don't even mention baptism in the invitation, saying "All who trust in Jesus and want to trust in him more are welcome." I slipped up on January 8 and said that in the midst of my nervous fumbling at the Table. Once I realized what I had done it was too late to correct myself. In my own personal opinion, my good friends who follow this practice are breaking with the Reformed understanding of COVENANT and the Sacraments being marks of the COVENANT. They do this out of pure motives, though. They want everyone to be included. But, to me, taking communion before baptism is putting the cart before the horse, and admitting all who trust instead of all who are baptized actually takes the initiative out of God's hands and puts it in our hands.
In closing, from now on my invitation to the Table will be word-for-word from the Book of Order because I take it seriously that in my ordination vows I promised to abide by the polity of the PC(USA). After I have clearly stated the parameters set out by our shared and agreed upon constitution, if someone comes forward who has not been baptized I will serve them anyway and would expect our elders to do so as well. It will have been their choice to partake, after having heard what our Book of Order states, and I don't think God is in the business of smiting people because they took communion before they were baptized. I will, however, contact that person in the following days to encourage them to make their public profession of faith and be baptized or if they are a young child I will encourage the parents to have their child baptized.
This is important stuff. After all, "It isn't just a snack. It is a reminder that Jesus loves us and that we love each other." What could be more important than that?
