OR as babies expereince in the Orthodox communion: baptized, confirmed and receive the Eucharist in one liturgy. From a Catholic perspective, the Church comfirms these as valid.

Jenny

Under the reforms of Pius X (at the turn of the last century), First Communion only requires that the child understand that it is not bread and wine that we receive but the body and blood of Our Lord – no other understanding is necessary.

And speaking of similarities, what opinion do people hold of “baby dedication ceremonies”? They always strike me as an ersatz baptism without water or exorcism.

One follow up thought. In Evangelical churches, children then to get baptized at about the same age that Catholic children take first communion. I think both churches understand that there is an age where children are aware of what their faith is all about.

“On a slight tangent, what about children in ‘believer’s baptism’ churches? When do they become eligible to participate in the Lord’s Supper? At what age, or what requirement?”

Here is where I start sounding like a hypocrite. In the church I grew up in, you had to be baptized before you participated. In Evangelical churches we talk about “an age of understanding” when it comes to Baptism. Typically we look for an ability to articulate the good news of Jesus Christ, that he died for our salvation. We also look that they are doing this on their own behalf and not because their parents want them to. Now there are exceptions to this. One of iMonk’s complaints is that in the Southern Baptist, children are getting Baptized as young as five.

Looking at my own situation, I was Baptized by Immersion at age 13 and started taking communion at that point. My wife was Baptized by being sprinkling at age 12 (not a typical evangelical practice), as a result in our current church she is free to take part in communion (as she is a believer), but is not eligible to be a member (as she was not immersed.) This second part is a peculiarity primarily to most (but not all) Baptist churches.

For children, in many churches it is when the parents feel that they are ready. My son, who is now 14, started taking communion when he was 10, as it was clear at that point that he was a believer. He has however, stated that he is not yet ready to be baptized. While this is a concern of mine, I very much want it to be his decision to do so. (My Protestantism talking.) I wish now, that I had told him to wait until he was baptized before taking communion, but I did not, so now I am stuck with that decision. (So I am somewhat hypocritical on the matter.)

My current quandry is this, my other children are girls, age 10 and 8. Both have made professions of faith and soon they are going to be asking about participating. I am not sure what to say to them.

There is a further complication. We have been struggling for the last two years concerning what to do about membership as my wife does not qualify in our current church. (She did in our previous church, which was not Baptist, but it closed, so we have not had to face this issue until now.)

We do love the church we are in. Other than this one issue, we are quite happy. So, inspite of everything I wrote up above about not believing in rebaptism, we are considering both being rebaptized as a way of showing that we want to identify with this particular community. One person had written to me (I think on an earlier iMonk post) that sometimes it is not always about being right.

If we do make this decision, we will probably ask our children if they would like to be baptized at the same time. Our youngest is a little of the young side, but she is very bright for her age, so I wouldn’t necessarily exclude her because of her age.

I would have trouble with the non-baptised communing in any Christian church, though, since baptism is the sacrament of initiation (and yeah, that’s my Catholicism talking). On a slight tangent, what about children in ‘believer’s baptism’ churches? When do they become eligible to participate in the Lord’s Supper? At what age, or what requirement?

The point of all this is Love, of bringing the Kingdom closer. Not doctrinal hair-splitting or membership requirements.

You’re basically saying that drunken Corinthian parties and the Lord’s Supper in a Presbyterian Church are committing the same error.

Is that the deduction of the text or the presupposition of the reader?

peace

ms

Paul does not condemn the Corinthians simply for feasting and getting drunk. He condemns them for failing to rightly administer the sacrament: they communed in an “unworthy manner,” they failed to “examine themselves,” they failed to “discern the body and blood.”

Paul tells them that they must examine themselves and judge themselves to be sinners in need of the saving power of Christ’s body and blood. By eating his body and blood we remember Christ’s work on the cross, and this faith saves us from being condemned by the world.

Closed communion is the churches way of ensuring that those communing have this scriptural understanding of body and blood and preventing others from bringing judgment on themselves.

I have been in many different types of Evangelical churches, and I have never heard communion offered to the non-Christian. Any communion I have ever been at has stated that “This is “The Lord’s table” and that all those who trust in Christ are welcome to partake. There is always an injunction to examine ourselves, along with a warning about a person’s sin state, and that if they have something against their brother or sister, that they need to set that straight first.

You write: “My point was how could I be acceptable to commune in a church where my baptism was not recognized?”

For most evangelicals the table is open to all who believe. They don’t care as much about your baptized state as they care about whether or not you trust in Christ.

Most of the churches I have attended have been that way. Only Some restrict it to Baptized believers or their own members.

Do we disagree on fundamental issues? Can you recite the Nicene creed without hesitation?

My point was how could I be acceptable to commune in a church where my baptism was not recognised? Communion of the unbaptised is just layering another level of confusion on top of it.

And no, I couldn’t just go up and take the bread and cup. I could physically do it, sure, but I could not in good conscience do it. I’m (for better or worse) a Catholic; if I’m not fit to receive in my own church through being in a state of sin, I certainly am not going to go up to the table in a completely different denomination and pretend we don’t disagree on fundamental issues and that it’s all only some kind of Happy Meal.