• Paedocommunion, the practice of giving communion to (weaned) infants, was a topic of debate at this year’s General Assembly because a minister had been ordained in our own presbytery (Pacific Northwest) who held the view. The denominational position is that communion can be given only to those “as are of years and ability to examine themselves.” While the man we ordained wasn’t in violation of PCA standards — namely that you can hold to paedocommunion but not teach or practice it — some doubted that such a clean break between conviction and practice was possible.
• Historically, Reformed churches have not practiced paedocommunion and Reformed theologians uniformly have not supported it. That includes Calvin. While there are arguments for it, the strongest being that the Lord’s Supper parallels and fulfills the Passover Feast which was certainly given to children, generally those arguments have not prevailed in our corner of Biblical Christianity. Efforts in the 1980s to change practices in the PCA were voted down.
• I believe what was really at stake in the debate this time around was how much latitude the PCA intends to give to those with views outside the mainstream. So, this part is interesting. While I seriously doubt there were many men in Greenville who hold to or favor paedocommunion, the vote to (in effect) permit the man to keep his credentials in the PCA went in his favor. It was an incredibly close vote, but it passed.
• On the principle involved, that we ordain men who hold views we wouldn’t want taught in our churches, I am conflicted. I was happy for this particular vote because the arguments for paedocommunion tend to lend strength to our doctrines of church and family (though I don’t hold the view myself, it gives a place to children in the Sacrament and implies the Church’s desire to nurture them). But what if the view weakened our view of church and family?
• I suspect, or rather I worry, that what’s really happening is men are simply less interested than they once were in giving care and thought to their doctrine. In other words, the vote may have reflected indifference. The trend in ecclesiology (doctrine of nature and practice of the Church) is more toward pragmatism than dogmatism. You may think this sounds positive (less argument), but it’s an ugly trend. Inevitably, what “works” is what will be taken as “true.” We want, on the other hand, to hold to what is true regardless of whether it works or not.
• Thanks for reading. Do the Stacys have all their meals covered? You can find out by logging on at “Mealbaby.” Thanks.