The editor of The Banner has made a pitch for children at the Lord’s Supper. If it isn’t an issue at present , it will become one, so he says. Which is simply a way of making it a problem—given the nature of The Banner in the denomination.

One can approach the issue from a principal and a practical point of view. Principally, there are certain things one must keep in mind. Notably, the difference between the two sacraments: participation in one does not automatically make one eligible for the other. Baptism symbolises our new birth, incorporation into the body of Christ. The candidate is passive, just as he was in his first birth. He is baptized it happens to him. This is true of the adult as much as the infant. God alone speaks; he takes the first step in our salvation.

In the Lord’s Supper there is a reciprocal response from our side: We take, eat (d rink), remember and believe. In the words of A. 76 of the Heidelberg Catechism, it is “to embrace with a believing heart all the sufferings and the death of Christ,” “making there confession of our faith and of the Christian religion” (B.C. Art. 35). We proclaim the Lord’s death when we partake.

For this reason a certain self-examination is called for (1 Cor. 11:20–32), to be sure that we partake in faith, confess ing our sin, trusting in the Lord Jesus for forgiveness and hav ing a desire to lead a godly life. This calls for a certain amount of spiritual maturity, and involves a confession of one’s faith. “Without their knowledge” our children share in the condemnation of Adam and are also received into grace in Christ by virtue of God’s covenant. But coming to the Lord’s Supper requires faith—which consists of a sure knowledge and a firm confidence. For that reason the church has always looked upon public profession of faith as the link between the two sacraments—the way to the communion table.

Precisely at what age that must take place is not so important. But there must be a measure of spiritual maturity and stability to take that step.

If one wishes now to separate public profession of faith and admittance to the Lord’s table, consider some of the practical difficulties.

1.) What is go ing to be the criterion for admittance to the Lord’s table, and who is going to decide that criterion? The Gereformeerde Kerken left the main responsibility to the parents. Some parents, however, take the matter very lightly while others take it much more seriously. The Banner editor wants to keep it in the hands of the consistory, since it is a churchly meal. But bow will the elders decide which children may attend and which may not? Not only do they often have insufficient knowledge of the younger children, but how will they explain why e.g. ten-year–olds of one family may attend, while twelve-year-olds of another may not? Human nature being what it is, can you just imagine the jealousy and hassles involved? Now at least all are judged by the same objective standard: public profession of faith.

2.) The Banner editor speaks of having children aged 10–12 coming to the Lord’s Supper. In many of our churches, formal catechetical training begins at age 12. So that means that candidates for the Lord’s Supper would have no systematic instruction by the time they come to the Lord’s Supper. What happens then to “discerning the Lord’s body”?

3.) At younger ages children are often somewhat eager and enthusiastic about the things of the church. Perhaps they would attend the L.S. without too much persuasion. But what about the ages of 15 through 18, e.g., when many become somewhat rebellious and indifferent to the faith? Must they then be barred from the L.S., or, if they do not attend, must they be admonished? And what about a young person who has attended communion from age 12, but is now 25 years of age, and has still never made a public profession of his faith? What then? Must he be told to stop coming until he does profess his faith? But if be has been allowed to come for all these years, can he now be barred from coming?

4.) Finally, would this practice not be placing a time-bomb under public profession of faith (to borrow a phrase from a Dutch theologian)? Would there still be real incentive to confess one’s faith, since they already have access to the Lord’s table? What would this do to the confessional nature of the church? Would young people be disciplined for not attending catechism and not confessing their faith?

These are just some of the many questions that arise. In my experience, a desire for a change in practice does not come from the young people themselves. Several who have waited a bit longer than one may have thought necessary have expressed their gratitude for doing so. They wanted to know what they were doing, and did not want to be half-hearted about it.

I see no benefit coming from a change such as was suggested by The Banner editor, but I do see all kinds of liabilities. We had better consider carefully what we are going to do. Not all changes are beneficiaL