Skip to main content

The Historicity of Paedocommunion

Concerning Paedocommunion:


I've seen people argue that it is not "Reformed," that is, it is not in line with the historic, Reformed confessions. This point I will grant, though there certainly were some Reformers who held it. This also assumes a mythological idea of a monolithic "Reformed Church" or "Reformed view" on any given matter, but we won't go down that road.

I've seen people argue against it exegetically, arguments being mainly drawn from 1 Corinthians 11. I ardently disagree with their interpretations of that passage. In fact, I think 1 Corinthians is one of the strongest defenses of Paedocommunion. Regardless, I can understand their line of argumentation.

What I have not seen is an explanation of how Paedocommunion is anything but a valid practice of the historic catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church has literally practiced it forever. We have multiple explicit statements from the early Church that support Paedocommunion. Augustine goes so far to argue from Paedocommunion to his view of the efficacy of the Sacraments, which implies that it was the accepted practice being used to prove an idea that was less universal.

When I have mentioned this historicity in past conversations with those who oppose Paedocommunion, the only response I have received is basically a general disregard of the Fathers.

We can have different positions on the Sacraments. Church history is full of Christians holding differing views within the realm of creedal orthodoxy, especially regarding the Sacraments. We should be able to discuss these things respectfully, agreeing to disagree.

Some opponents of Paedocommunion, however, act as if it is a historic aberration. They paint it as a fringe view associated with the Federal Vision or other less-than-reformed groups. The reality is that Paedocommunion was an accepted, if not universal, view in the Early Church. They may not like it, but that is the historic reality.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...

Anglicanism, Paedocommunion, & Being Reformed

I consider myself Reformed.  I was baptized as a baby in a PCA church.  I grew up in a Reformed microdenomination that allowed its member churches to subscribe to any of the Reformed confessions (we subscribed to the Three Forms of Unity).  In many ways, whether I like it or not, I still think and act like a Reformed Presbyterian.   Some, however, would seek to deny me that label.  I suspect there are many reasons for this, but paramount among them is that I hold to Paedocommunion (hereafter PC), which, for some reason, is absolutely the worst thing ever to these people.  Some would go so far as to say that PC makes me a heretic, but they all agree that I am certainly not Reformed .   My recent engagement with these opponents of PC has caused me to reflect on what it means to be Reformed and what it means to be a Christian.  This online jousting has dovetailed well with some of my recent study, particularly  An Apology of the Church...

Some Thoughts on the 2024 Election

So, we had an election earlier this week.  Perhaps you heard about it. I have done my best to remain mostly silent on political issues this time around because I have found that fixating on such matters does little for my mental or spiritual health.  Also, no one cares what I think.  Nevertheless, here are a few thoughts on our recent election. 1) I didn't vote for Donald Trump, but I'd be lying if I said I'm not glad he won.  To be clear, that says more about Kamala Harris than about Donald Trump. 2) This election seemed much cleaner--much less suspicious--than the sordid affair we had in 2020.  This election didn't feature any poll workers tallying (discovering? conjuring?) votes behind closed doors in the wee hours of the night, messy mail-in voting, or voter turnout beyond plausible expectations.  The 2020 election had me convinced that we would never see another peaceful, uncontested election, but, as contentious as things were this year, it seems like...