Children at the Lord's Table?: Assessing the Case for Paedocommunion

by Cornelis P. Venema

A growing trend among Reformed churches is the practice of admitting young children to the Lord's Supper. In Children at the Lord's Table? , Cornelis P. Venema provides an insightful analysis of the theoretical arguments used by advocates of this recent trend. After clarifying terms and explaining arguments often made in favor of paedocommunion, he considers the history of the church's confessions, teaching, and practice regarding the proper recipients of the Lord's Supper. Presenting a historical, exegetical, and systematic treatment of the subject, Venema demonstrates the validity and value of having covenant children partake of first communion subsequent to their personal profession of faith. This is an invaluable resource for every pastor within the Reformed tradition.
Table of
1. Introducing the Question
2. Paedocommunion in Church History
3. Paedocommunion and the Reformed Confessions
4. The Old Testament Evidence Regarding the Participation of Children in Covenant Observances
5. The New Testament Evidence Regarding Paedocommunion
6. A Key 1 Corinthians 111:17-34
7. Concluding Observations and Evaluation
Covenant Theology and Baptism

Genres: Theology, Christianity, Christian, Ecclesiology

198 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 2009

About the author

Venema is Dean of the Faculty and Professor of Doctrinal Studies at Mid-America Reformed Seminary, Dyer, Indiana. He gained his doctorate from Princeton Theological Seminary for work on the theology of John Calvin and has served as a pastor in the Christian Reformed Church in Ontario, California, and South Holland, Illinois.

Reviews

[Zach McDonald · Rating 3 out of 5]

First off, I'd like to say that the last chapter is the most significant chapter of this book and really the only chapter that need be read - unless you are looking for more specific arguments. In the last chapter, the author provides a summary of all of his arguments, including a helpful critique of Federal Vision.

Overall, I did not find the argument presented here to be entirely convincing - though I wanted it to be. I lean towards paedocommunion for covenantal not sacramentalist reasons, and I was hoping this would be the best defense against it. What I found, however, was simply the same rhetoric against the practice - nothing entirely significant. Venema actually presents his opponents very well. He sets up no straw men. Rather, he sets up the argument as it is but, in my opinion, fails to tear it down. The entire time I kept thinking to myself "is this not the same reason why baptists despise infant baptism?"

Because paedocommunion is not accepted broadly in reformed circles, my desire is to find Scriptural reason to deny it, but unfortunately this was just another fall through. Borrow the book from a friend and read the last chapter, that is my only suggestion.

[Peter Bringe · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had been meaning to read this book for a while, and I am glad I finally did. From my experience with paedocommunionists (those who believe that communion should be given to all who are baptized, including children who have not made any statement of faith), Dr. Venema seems to accurately portray their arguments. The main argument Venema counters is the claim that to deny the Lord Supper to children until they are able to examine themselves and profess their faith contradicts the idea that they are members of the covenant. A related argument he counters is that since children participated in the Passover, thus they should participate in the Lord's Supper. Venema argues with biblical basis that (1) to deny some privileges to covenant members does not deny their covenant membership, (2) it was not mandatory nor common for children to partake in the Passover, (3) the Lord's Supper does not only form a counterpart to Passover, but to all the feasts and sacrificial meals of the old covenant, including the Exodus 24 meal of the 70 elders, (4) the rules for participation in these feasts and meals varied, (5) instead of looking to the old covenant to determine the participates of the Lord Supper, we should look to the new covenant that actually talks about it, specifically 1 Corinthians 11, (6), and thus that the communion should be reserved for those who can actively and self-consciously participate through faith, examining themselves, discerning the Lord's body, and remember His death. Venema also address historical and confessional arguments. He also compares baptism and the Lord Supper, showing why his position on each is not contradictory of the other. While the credo/paedo baptism debate addresses the question, "who is in the covenant?", this is not true for the credo/paedo communion debate.

One area where I think Venema could have improved his argument was explaining the connection between the requirement to examine oneself, etc. and a public profession of faith and a judgement by the elders admitting the child to the table. He seems to assume the connection and jump from one to the other. I think I see the connection, but it would have been helpful if he would have addressed it more.

Also, at the very end he critiques the Federal Vision view of covenant theology and sacraments. He states that this movement underlies the current advocacy of paedocommunion. I appreciate and value his critique, and I agree that Federal Vision is one reason why one might hold to paedocommunion. Yet, while all who are Federal Visionist hold to paedocommunion, not all who hold to or argue for paedocommunion are Federal Visionist.

"The spiritual significance and benefit of the Passover Feast embraced all of the people of Israel, men and women, mature and immature, old and young–no one was excluded from an enjoyment of the covenant privileges that the Passover signified and commemorated. It was not necessary or obligatory for a child to participate in every aspect of the Passover celebration in order to benefit from the rite. Just as the women and younger children were not required to keep the Passover in Jerusalem but still benefited from its spiritual significance, the fact that younger children did not participate of all the elements of the Passover meal, or share in every feature of the ritual, did not compromise their place in the covenant community." (p. 70)

"Only those who have examined themselves in the faith, and who have rightly discerned the body of Christ (and the implications of the one body for the unity among believers), should come to the Table, remembering and believing Christ's sacrifice on the cross. These requirements for the reception of Christ in the sacrament are the basis for the historic insistence of the Reformed churches that those who are admitted to the Table of the Lord be professing believers...Such a profession of faith principally confirms that the covenant member can eat and drink the body and blood of Christ with the 'mouth of faith.'" (p. 124)

[K. · Rating 3 out of 5]

The main part I found unconvincing was the dichotomy between baptism and communion with regards to faith. There are just as many Scriptural statements that associate baptism with active faith as there are that state the Lord's supper must be received by faith. So, if I was to be fully convinced of the author's interpretation of, e.g. 1 Corinthians 11, I'd probably have to go back to being a Baptist.

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is a decent enough book, though the author's writing style is a bit tedious.

[JonM · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was raised according to Venema's position, and so I can sympathize with a majority of his concerns. But exegetically, this book does not properly represent the pro-paedocommunion side of the argument, and it also avoids some of the most obvious biblical passages in favor of paedocommunion.

[Jim Ritchhart · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this book up to read after teaching on Covenant Baptism at my church and feeling like I did not answer the question of children at the Lord's table very well.
This is an excellent explanation of the similarities and differences in the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper. I do agree with some of the reviews that the last chapter - which summarizes the entire book and provides a summary of classical reformed covenant theology - is the most significant chapter in the book. Also, you could read it and in a few short hours and answer most of the questions you might have on the subject without reading 170+ pages. Although, I did enjoy all the details as well.
Dr. Venema addresses the subject of Paedocommunnion from a historical, confessional, and scriptural perspective. Although his emphasis is scriptural (sola scriptura), it is important to understand how the church has interpreted the subject of unbelieving covenant children at the Lord's table throughout church history as well as the position of the reformers during the protestant reformation when biblical topics were being reexamined.
I liked the book. I would recommend the book. However, again, if you want a quick - and fairly comprehensive - overview of the topic, read the last chapter.

[Jordan Carl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dr. Venema attempts in this short volume to lay out a relatively brief historical, confessional, and biblical case for the historic Reformed position of limiting the table to those able to make a “credible profession of faith”.

The strengths of this little book are his confessional analysis of the Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity as well as his analysis of John 6.

The weaknesses of this book are the lack of engagement with some of the more nuanced positions of advocates for PC, namely: infantile faith, the exegetical arguments for interpreting our Lord’s command to “remember” and “discern the body” as ecclesiological over and against soteriological, his somewhat cursory review of the historical theology, and finally his minimal engagement with 1 Cor 10 as the basis for much of the PC argument.

Overall, this book is helpful but I would have loved to see a little more exegesis of the germane texts in effort to give more substance to his arguments. Also, the book costs $25 which is way overpriced for such a small volume (although I recognize the limited audience this subject matter would attract).

[Kaelee Dewit · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author presents a fairly in-depth argument against paedocommunion. One could get away with only reading the final chapter and have a fairly decent understanding of the arguments against.

While I’m sure the author was hoping to convince the reader of credocommunion, his arguments instead convinced me more of paedocommunion. His attempts to argue credocommunion left me with similar inconsistencies that I find with credobaptism.

[Ellie Bartsch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Venema is extremely thorough. It felt like I was reading a massive essay. He did a good job of covering everything but at the same time, I felt like I was reading the same thing three times over at times. If I could do it over, I'd probably only read the last chapter. He goes over all the arguments again briefly in that one.

[Andrzej Stelmasiak · Rating 4 out of 5]

Now, this book was good and I have appreciated it, he made a few very significant arguments that helped me to think through the paedocommunionist position. Unfortunately it suffers from tedious repetition, it looks like the author could do with an editor that has access to thesaurus.

[Benjamin Davenport · Rating 3 out of 5]

I fully agree with the theology here, but this was quite a cumbersome read. I feel it could have been much more pointed and concise. Unfortunately, I do not know of any other major works addressing the issue of paedocommunion. 3.5

[Sean McGowan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very helpful book. His exegesis of 1 Corinthians 11 is helpful in regard to the debate around paedocommunion. If you hold to paedocommunion, this is a book to engage with.

[Jacob · Rating 2 out of 5]

Helpful on many points, especially the chapter on Reformation era teaching on the Lord's Supper. Self-referential and highly redundant (e.g. "I will talk about X later" happens far to often), with an over use of personal pronouns (e.g. "I'm inclined",etc.). The book could have been about 3/4 the size with better editing. Good points on several key texts, but due to the style it was unconvincing at times where it could have been stronger.

Personally, I am a Baptist and found many of the arguments for paedobaptism as wonky as usual, and due to this blinder on the author's perspective, his ability to confidently refute paedocommunion is stunted.

Overall, the book is helpful as an introduction, but I'm not sure it's the best treatment that could be produced on the subject. Douglas Wilson and Lane Keister's interactive reviews were very helpful in digesting this book.

[Jerry · Rating 2 out of 5]

I reviewed this pig chapter by chapter at ye old blog www.jwowen.com, but suffice to say I found it lacking. It gets two stores on the positive side because of a good essay on the covenant at the end which I think contradicts his baptistic view of kids: baptize them because they been given promises, but make them give another type of profession (which remains undescribed and ambiguous) before admitting them to the Table. Weird.

[Kirk · Rating 3 out of 5]

If nothing else, Venema is very careful in his reasoning, verging on the pedantic. He is even-keeled and keeps on task. However, he doesn't deal with some of the objections leveled against the reformed tradition of excluding covenant children from the Table. So in the end, his assessment is largely unsatisfying.

[Frode · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clearly written, logically put together, I think Venema does a good job of defending the non-paedo communion position.

[Mark Lickliter · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tough issue.