In following Lane Keister’s arguments against Paedocommunion, I continue to ask these sorts of questions:
Why does a simple, credible profession of faith have to be spoken in words? Why not with actions, signs or symbols? Why not with a gesture? Why learn the catechisms of the Reformed faith? Why not the Apostle’s Creed? Why not the Nicene Creed? How to define the gospel? Narrowly: Christ is Lord? Comprehensively: Lord, Messiah, Death, Burial, Resurrection, Ascension, Second Coming, etc.? What does being “ready” to partake of bread and wine mean? A,B,C or A,B,C & D?
I am afraid I must agree with you on this one. I do believe that Lane has a bit of a tough position to handle. If I Corinthians 11 requires only a profession of faith, then why not a two year old profession of faith? Why not simply asking to be allowed to eat the bread?
However, I would like to point out that in this debate between Rev. Keister and Rev. Wilson that an important position is not being represented. The position of confirmation. Confirmation used to be required before one was allowed to partake of their first communion. This practice is still done in many Lutheran churches and some Reformed Churches such as the RCUS. Thus, I believe it answers your question of what should be required. If I Corinthians 11 requires more than a mere profession of faith, but rather it requires real doctrinal knowledge and understanding of the church as well as the supper, and of course faith, then your question is answered. A gesture will not do. A profession will not do. Rather the person must learn the doctrines of the church, which the church teaches the child in confirmation. They have to learn the Reformed confession/catechism because they are members of the Reformed church. If they are members of the Lutheran Church, then a Lutheran, etc.
This practice has its roots in the Protestant Reformation. Luther required catechism. Matin Bucer introduced it into the South German Reformed cities. John Calvin required Confirmation. And I am pretty positive it was done in Basel as well. In fact, I think this is often why the Reformed wrote Catechisms in the first place.
I am interested to hear your thoughts on this subject.
Thanks,
Lee Johnson
Lee, too busy at this point. But my point about I Cor. 11 is that it does not require anything but water baptism to come to the Table. Calvin and Bucer were simply wrong on this issue, if I can be so bold. Catechisms serve as instruments of maturity and knowledge to a faith that already exists via baptism and is already being nourished via bread and wine.
Similar to the questions I have.