What Mean Ye?

By Dr. Richard Bacon

Chapters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

5. The Promise Fulfilled: Passover Replaced

We may now approach the New Testament meal of the Lord's Supper with an Old Testament understanding of the Passover. If our model (hypothesis) regarding the Passover is correct, then we should expect to find certain features surrounding it in the New Testament. Additionally, we would be surprised (based on our model) if we found certain other features incorporated.

For instance, on the basis of Deuteronomy 16:2, we would expect to see participants (covenantal adult males) going to Jerusalem to keep the Passover. Additionally, on the basis of our understanding of Exodus 12:26-27, we would expect to see the children of the participants involved in catechism. Moreover, based on Exodus 12:3-4 and 12:21, we would expect to see a counting of adult males (a.k.a. "men") taking place around the time of the Passover. Finally, based on Numbers 9:1-6 and II Chronicles 30:8, we would expect to see an increased awareness and concern over ceremonial cleanness.

On the other hand, if our understanding of Scripture is correct, we would be surprised to find women partaking of the Passover meal. Additionally, our model would be falsified if we found children partaking of the Passover apart from catechetical activity. We would have cause to suspect our hypothesis if we saw the Passover taking place outside Jerusalem. Finally, if there were little or no concern over ceremonial cleanness on the part of Passover participants we would be required to find a reason for the lack of concern. So then, let us take a look at the New Testament based on our model and see if our hypothesis accounts for the facts that we find there.

We are told very little in Scripture about the childhood of Jesus. However, the one incident that the Holy Spirit has chosen to tell us, in Luke 2:40 ff., regards the Passover and Christ as a child. In this account we see at least two of the features associated with the Passover that we would expect to find. We see both a "pilgrimage" to Jerusalem on the part of Passover participants and catechism of children being associated with the meal.

At this point in His life, Jesus was no longer a young child, but was about twelve years old (vv. 40, 42). It was obvious that the grace of God was upon Him. That is, He was no longer a child so young that He could not discern between good and evil (v. 40). His parents went up to the feast of the Passover every year, but it is recorded that Jesus went up to the Passover at Jerusalem when He was twelve (vv. 41-42).

There is no evidence whatsoever in this passage that Christ Himself partook of the Passover at the age of twelve. Luke records the fact that He went up to Jerusalem and that His parents first missed Him when they were some distance from Jerusalem during their trip home (vv. 44-45). Even if it were the case that Jesus actually partook of the Passover at the age of twelve, the passage clearly tells us that previous to going up to Jerusalem at the age of twelve, He had already "waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him." This was no infant at the Passover; not even the infant Savior.

When Joseph and Mary finally found Christ after three days, He was involved in what we would today call a catechism class (vv. 46-47). Christ was both hearing and answering questions from the doctors in verse 46. More than that, He astonished His hearers by posing questions and indicating His understanding of the answers to both His questions and the doctors'. Here we have an excellent example of what our Larger Catechism calls "years and ability to discern the Lord's body" (Larger Catechism, # 177). Christ had reached an age at which it was apparent to all who knew Him that the grace of God was upon Him. At that time, He went to Jerusalem and there He demonstrated by questions and answers His ability to understand what the Passover entailed.

Luke concludes this incident in the life of Christ with the information that the child Jesus continued subject to His parents. He continued to grow in wisdom. He did not simply begin to grow in grace and wisdom and favor at that time. The wisdom had obviously been there previously, both before going to Jerusalem and while in Jerusalem. We can therefore say that in the case of our Savior, His first Passover meal was eaten after He had shown both years and ability. Our model caused us to expect that in the case of children being admitted to the Passover we would see prior or contemporary catechetical instruction. That is precisely what we find in the New Testament, even in the case of our Lord.

Our model requires us to expect more than pilgrimages and catechism, however. Our model additionally requires that there would be a counting near the Passover, and that it would specifically be a counting of adult males (men). For an examination of that aspect, we must turn to some parallel passages in the New Testament: John 6:1-13 together with Matthew 14:15-21, Mark 6:30-44, and Luke 9:12-17. These are definitely parallel passages, because in each we find 5,000 men, five loaves, two fishes and twelve baskets full of fragments.

Many paedocommunionists make the claim that the count that was commanded in Exodus 12 was to include the entire family and that the entire family, including women and children, was to partake of the Passover with the adult males. They produce as evidence for this the fact that everyone ate the manna in the wilderness and that Elkanah's family partook of the offering in I Samuel chapter one.

But if paedocommunionists want to know how the counting for lambs worked, the best and irrefutable way to do it would be to find an example in Scripture of that very counting taking place, and not to resort to the eating of manna or bullocks. Does Scripture contain such an example? If the paedocommunionist cannot produce an example from Scripture of either infants or young children taking part in the Passover or the Lord's Supper, then he has no argument. But he claims that the counting that is to take place for the lambs is precisely that example. If we show that the counting that took place was of men only and not of entire families regardless of age or sex, then the paedocommunionist has no further argument.

John tells us in John 6:4 that the Passover was near. John apparently included this information to let us know why such a large company was following the Lord on this occasion. Because it was near the Passover, we can understand why such a large crowd would be walking through the Galilean wilderness. They were on their way to Jerusalem; and they had a count of the number of men in the party. We do not have scriptural information on the age of the lad in the party who gave his lunch to Andrew, but from Luke 2:40 ff. we can surmise that he was at least twelve years old. The Greek word that is translated "lad" in John 6:9 is paidavrion which, according to Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon, means "a youth who is no longer a child" or "a young slave."

In John 6:10, the disciples (i.e., the apostles) made the men sit down on the grass; and we are told that the men numbered about five thousand. The disciples then distributed fish and barley loaves to them that were set down (v. 11). After gathering up twelve baskets full of fragments, the passage tells us, "then those men, when they had seen . . . " (v. 14). The parallel passage in Matthew is even clearer, for in Matthew 14:21 we read, "And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children." It is very clear that the count was of men only (not because this was Passover, but because Passover was nigh).

The word used in Matthew 14:21 is often made to read besides, as though the men were in addition to women and children who were also present but uncounted. Although that alone would be sufficient to prove that the counting for the lambs was a counting of men only, the underlying Greek is even more devastating to the paedocommunionist's view. The Greek of v. 21 is chôris gunaikon, i.e. chôris plus genitive. The primary meaning of chôris plus genitive is "separated from someone, far from someone, without someone" (e.g. I Corinthians 11:11, which reads, "Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord" [emphasis added]). Note also that the cognates of this preposition have similar meanings. The verb means "divide" or "separate" and the noun, chôrismos, means "a division." So Matthew 14:21 at least teaches that the men (only) were numbered for the Passover feast.

Mark 6:44 seems also to bear this out, for Mark informs us "they that did eat of the loaves were about five thousand men." Period! Also Luke 9:13-14 says that "all this people" consisted of "about five thousand men." The only gospel that mentions women and children insists that the men were apart from them with the Passover nigh (Matthew 14:21; cf. John 6:4).

A further confirmation of our Old Testament model is found in the concern, particularly just prior to Passover, on the part of many people in the New Testament. During the last week of Christ's earthly ministry, for example, He referred to the Pharisees as "whited sepulchres." Alfred Edersheim, in his book The Temple: Its Ministry and Services as They Were at the Time of Christ, explains the background for this (pp. 216-217).

"In general, cemeteries were outside the cities; but any dead body found in the field was (according to an ordinance which tradition traces up to Joshua) to be buried on the spot where it had been discovered. Now, as the festive pilgrims [to the Passover] might have contracted `uncleanness' by unwitting contact with such graves, it was ordered that all `sepulchres' should be `whitened' a month before the Passover. It was, therefore, evidently in reference to what He actually saw going on around Him at the time He spoke, that Jesus compared the Pharisees `unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.'"

Similar examples are found throughout the gospels, but particularly in John, of meticulous attention to the details of ceremonial or Levitical cleanness at the time of the Passover. In John 11:55, many of the Jews of that day "went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the Passover, to purify themselves." We are told that when the Chief Priests took Jesus to Pilate, "they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover" (John 18:28b). This purification, or preparation, continued through the entirety of the week of the feast of unleavened bread. In fact, that entire week was known as Passover at that time because the commencement of it was the Passover day. John chapter nineteen affords several examples of the attention to this preparation or purification (see John 19:14, 31, 42).

We find in the New Testament, then, exactly what our model or hypothesis would suggest, viz., meticulous attention to the details of Levitical cleanness at the time of the Passover. The tragic part of this detailed attention on the part of the Pharisees is that they had great concern over the typical but not for what was being represented by the types. Their concern, in other words, was only for the outward ceremonies and not for the inward heart relationship toward God that was required by II Chronicles 30:6-8.

The Pharisees, Chief Priests and Scribes had perverted the meaning and intent of God's law. That should come as no surprise, because they had also perverted the meaning of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:2, 7; John 5:16, 18; 7:23-24), honoring father and mother (Matthew 15:4-9; Mark 7:8-13) and the righteousness of the law in general (Matthew 5:20; 20:18; etc.). But the fact that the Pharisees perverted God's law should not cause us to lose sight of the fact that God's law enjoined the Jews to examine themselves and to discern the proper applications of God's law. This is a requirement that was placed only on adult males at the sacrament of the Passover (Deuteronomy 16:2, 16-17). With the advent of Christ, we no longer have priests to examine us with respect to God's law (cf. Numbers 9:1-13), but are required to examine ourselves. This should shed some additional light on Paul's intention in I Corinthians 11:27-30 when we come to that place in Scripture.

We come now to the actual institution of the Lord's Supper by Christ. Significantly, the institution of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper took place at Christ's last Passover. In becoming our Passover the next day (I Corinthians 5:7; 11:23 ff.), Christ additionally abrogated the Passover together with all the Old Testament ceremonial feasts (Hebrews 8:4-5; Colossians 2:14-17; cf. Westminster Confession 19:3).

Luke identifies the feast of unleavened bread with the Passover in Luke 22:1, "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover." The original institution of the Passover included not only the actual Passover meal, but an entire week of eating no leaven (see Exodus 12:15-17 and Leviticus 23:5-8). This will become evident when we examine Paul's injunction in I Corinthians 5:7 to "purge out the old leaven."

In Luke 22:7 we read that "the day of unleavened bread" is identical to the day in which the "Passover must be killed." Luke goes on in verse 13 to inform us that after finding an appropriate place within the city of Jerusalem "they made ready the Passover." Christ then proceeded at that very Passover meal to institute the Lord's Supper in verses 19-20.

At this meal we see precisely what our Old Testament model led us to expect. Although Christ had shown supreme love for His female disciples and for children during His earthly ministry, at this Passover meal only adult males were invited. The meal did not take place in His hometown of Nazareth nor in His adopted hometown of Capernaum, nor even in His birthplace of Bethlehem, but in Jerusalem within sight of the temple.

At this point we know from scriptural testimony that at least Peter was married, for Matthew 8:14-15 refers to his mother-in-law. But not only are no children present, there are no wives present either. We would additionally expect from Exodus 12:45 that no servants would be present, and we learn from John 13:4 ff. that such was the case. Moreover, the Passover was to be an evening meal, and we learn from Matthew 26:20 that "when even was come, He sat down with the twelve."

We should additionally expect a count of adult males for the meal. Matthew 26:20 informs us that "He sat down with the twelve." Mark 14:17 tells us "And in the evening He cometh with the twelve." Luke 22:14 refers to the fact that "He sat down and the twelve apostles with Him."

There was a heightened concern also on the part of Christ and His apostles over ceremonial cleanness as represented by the purging of leaven from the entire dwelling in which the meal took place. Matthew 26:17 clearly indicates that the preparation for Passover involved more than simply buying the provisions. The disciples came to Jesus on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread and asked, "Where wilt thou that we prepare for Thee to eat the Passover?" If we had no Old Testament background for this question, we might suppose that the disciples were merely asking Christ where they should rent a room. But we know that as part of the preparation for Passover, Exodus 12:15 commanded, "even the first day [of the feast of unleavened bread] ye shall put away leaven out of your houses."

The ancient Israelites were commanded not to eat any leaven for the entire period of the feast. But more than that, they were required to purge out the leaven from their houses on the first day of the feast. This typified their responsibility to remain pure during their entire lives, but especially during Passover week (Leviticus 2:4-5, 11; cf. Matthew 16:6, 11-12). This, of course, is also typified by the required Levitical cleanness of Numbers 9:1-13.

So at the final Passover and first Lord's Supper we have found exactly what our model demanded that we find. There was a counting of adult males only, household servants were not present, no women or children were present, there was a heightened concern over ceremonial cleanness and it was eaten on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread, during the evening meal.

Someone might object at this point that this could not have been Passover because John 18:28 tells us that the servants of the high priest had not yet eaten the Passover. Furthermore, it was still the "preparation of the Passover" when Pilate delivered Christ for crucifixion (John 19:14 ff.). Also, John 19:31 and 42 inform us that it was still the "Jews' preparation day" when Jesus died and was laid in His sepulchre. All of these events took place after Christ had instituted the Lord's Supper, so if it was still the "preparation," surely the Lord's Supper was not instituted during the Passover meal.

The difficulty with leaning so heavily on John's testimony taken alone is that the synoptic gospels are unanimous in their claim that the supper was, in fact, the Passover meal. The difficulty, in other words, does not lie in harmonizing all four gospels, but only in harmonizing John's gospel with the other three. Specifically, John 13:29; 18:28; 19:14; 19:31 and 19:42 seem to indicate that the Passover meal was still future right up to the time of Christ's entombment. But this objection misses the importance of Luke 22:1, in which the entire feast of unleavened bread is called the Passover.

Luke, though possibly a Gentile convert himself, is following Old Testament usage by referring to the entire seven-day festival as Passover. Deuteronomy 16:2-3 speaks of sacrificing the Passover and "seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith." When the Passover was eaten in the days of King Josiah, it again was kept for seven days, as it had been in the days of Hezekiah (II Chronicles 35:17; 30:21).

The "preparation of the Passover," then, could be referring to the remainder or some part of the remainder of the feast of unleavened bread. According to Alfred Edersheim, in the work cited earlier, a special Chagigah was offered on the day after Passover. "It is this second Chagigah which the Jews were afraid they might be unable to eat, if they contracted defilement in the judgment-hall of Pilate" (p. 218). This would also explain that the feast mentioned in John 13:29 is not merely the Passover meal, but the entire feast of unleavened bread (Exodus 12:15-17; Leviticus 23:6-8; etc.).

We have learned previously that the Passover and subsequent feast of unleavened bread required a detailed knowledge of God's law. The participants were to "examine themselves" for conformity to the law and to refrain from eating if they were in any way ceremonially defiled. Although the Pharisees had polluted this requirement with their own leaven, or impure doctrine, nevertheless they still had respect to the letter of God's requirement. Paul has not added a new requirement of self-examination to the Old Testament sacrament, but has stated the Old Testament principle in New Testament terms.

Anti-paedocommunionists today do not, properly speaking, add a requirement to the New Testament sacrament which was not present already for the people of God in the Old Testament. Westminster Confessional Presbyterians do not narrow the covenant of grace as do anti-paedobaptists. The infants of the Church enjoy all the privileges of the covenant under the new economy that they did under the old. As they were circumcised, so are they baptized. As they were taught to examine themselves and then confirmed by catechism before partaking of Passover, so are they before partaking of the Lord's Supper.

This brings us finally to Paul's interpretation of Passover in light of the death and resurrection of Christ. The paedocommunionists are correct when they say that Paul gives no separate instructions for children. What they fail to observe is that the reason no separate instructions are needed is that the children never rightfully partook of the Passover. Without so much as a single example of children partaking of Passover apart from catechism in either the Old Testament or Gospels, we should not expect Paul to repeat the requirement that children are to ask meaningful questions and receive understandable answers. Rather, what we should expect is an explanation from Paul of the spiritual significance of the Passover (II Corinthians 3:6). Such is just what we find in the three places in I Corinthians in which Paul treats of the Passover and Lord's Supper.

As we have learned, Passover was the first day of the feast of unleavened bread (Exodus 12:15-17; Leviticus 23:6-8; John 13:29; etc.). We saw that the Israelites were to refrain from eating leaven, but also that they were required to "put away leaven out of your houses." Furthermore, we saw that the Old Testament meal offering was without leaven (Leviticus 2:11; 6:17; etc.). Leaven is obviously typical of something beyond itself.

Numbers 9:1-13 taught us that any sort of Levitical uncleanness would disqualify even a circumcised adult male from keeping Passover. The men who approached Moses and Aaron in Numbers 9 were apparently aware of their state of ceremonial uncleanness (Numbers 5:2) and thus they asked, "Wherefore are we kept back" from the Passover? The question is a legitimate one in those circumstances. Exactly one year earlier the men of Israel had been commanded to slay the Passover, "and this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever" (Exodus 12:14; cf. vv. 17, 24, 42; 13:10). Now a second time God commanded Israel to keep the Passover "in his appointed season: according to all the rites of it, and according to all the ceremonies thereof, shall ye keep it" (Numbers 9:4).

These men desired to offer an offering to the Lord, but were unqualified to do so. Their awareness of their condition in light of God's law prevented them from partaking of Passover at that time. The spiritual significance of a people sanctified to the Lord was to be maintained. Just as there was a spiritual significance to purging out the leaven from their houses, so was there a spiritual significance to each man examining himself in light of God's law.

Both Christ and Paul speak in the New Testament of the true spiritual significance of leaven. Christ warns us of the leaven of false doctrine (Matthew 16:6) and Paul warns us of the leaven of a defective life (I Corinthians 5:6-8). These two cannot be separated, for the Scriptures principally teach "what man is to believe concerning God and what duty God requires of man" (Shorter Catechism, # 3, emphasis added).

Paul used the illustration of the Passover to insist that the Church is to discipline those whose lives continue out of accord with the teaching of God's law. Paul asked the Corinthian Church in I Corinthians 5:6, "Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?" All leaven is dangerous, Paul insisted. Even one fornicator in the Church will corrupt the entire Church, just as a little leaven in the house disqualified the ancient Israelite from the feast. The command that Paul then gives us is not a new command, but the obvious application of Exodus 12:15 and Leviticus 2:11. Purge out the leaven and keep the feast! But notice that the unleavened bread of our lives is "sincerity and truth." Sincerity is here used for pure motives, as it is in II Corinthians 2:17. We saw the importance of pure motives in offering sacrifices when we looked at the offerings of Cain and Abel. We saw that one of the things that made the offering of Abel acceptable to God was that it was offered from pure motives. Now here, Paul insists that the Lord's Supper must also be celebrated with the unleavened bread of sincerity or purity of motive. This is an obviously adult requirement, even as it was in the case of Abel's sacrifice.

The word for "truth" is also a term that implies rationality at least to the extent necessary to discern the true from the false. Paul in verse 8 insists that the feast of unleavened bread was and still is to be observed with the adult-like qualities of pure godly motivation and the discernment to know truth from error. If it should be objected at this point that Paul applies sincerity and truth only to adult participants, then we must once again remind the reader that any children present at the Passover were to ask, "What mean ye by this service?"

Any children present at the service were required to be sufficiently rational to ask and, we suppose, understand the meaning of the service. But Paul additionally informs us that the meaning of unleavened bread has to do with motives and discernment. Here then we see the reason for children being held back until such time as they demonstrate sufficient lucidity to inquire into the actual meaning of the ordinance. The men in Numbers 9:1-13 were held back because after examining themselves in light of God's law, they found themselves unclean. They had the years and ability to make that discernment. Paul declared in I Corinthians 5:8 that all who keep the feast must do so with pure motives and discernment.

Paul makes his next reference to the Lord's Supper (table) in I Corinthians 10. He introduces his subject with the reminder, "I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say" (v. 15). He begins his reference to the table by speaking of the cup of blessing. This was the third cup of wine at the "Permanent" Passover. Remember that the Passover usually was accompanied by four cups of wine; hardly a beverage or quantity fitting for infants. Although it is not mentioned in Exodus 12, the wine was an integral part of the meal as seen from the institution of the Lord's Supper and from Paul's reference to it here in I Corinthians 10:16. The implication is unmistakable that wine is part and parcel of the Lord's Supper and furthermore that in drinking it we also bless it. This matter of "blessing" is also important for our discussion.

The term "we bless" is present indicative active of the verb eulogeô, "speak well of." The Lord's Supper, in other words, requires rational speech on the part of the participant. This is precisely the sort of rational speech used in the catechetical exercise required in Exodus 12:26-27. When children finally became old enough to take a catechetical role in the Passover, they were required to ask, "What mean ye by this service?" They did not simply ask what their fathers were doing. That would be obvious enough. Rather, they asked about the spiritual significance of what they saw their fathers doing. Then, as the fathers answered that it was the sacrifice of the Lord's Passover, the people would bow their heads and worship (or "speak well of" or "bless") the Lord Himself (Exodus 12:27). It is also the rational speech in which our Savior was engaged in Luke 2:47 where "all that heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers" [emphasis added], at the age of twelve. Therefore, when the apostle Paul provides instruction respecting the Lord's Supper, it is unnecessary for him to state that infants are not participants; rather, he presupposes that they are not.

We come finally to the passage to which anti-paedocommunionists usually and naturally refer first. "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world" (I Corinthians 11:27-32).

It was a general principle of Old Testament Levitical cleanness that the unclean person was to be examined and then undergo whatever ritual was appropriate for his cleansing. This was so much a part of the Old Testament economy that God told Israel through Moses and Aaron, "But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the Lord" (Numbers 19:20).

For example, a suspected leper was brought to the priest for examination. This was not because the priest was a doctor, but because the priest was expected to know the details of the law of God sufficiently to be able to examine and verify a case of leprosy. "When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising . . . then he shall be brought unto Aaron the priest, or unto one of his sons the priests . . . then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a leprosy" (Leviticus 13:2, 8).

There are no longer specific persons set aside as priests in the New Testament. Instead, each professor is a priest unto God (I Peter 2:9). Along with this privilege comes the responsibility of knowing the law sufficiently to be able to examine oneself. The laws regarding leprosy have passed with the passing of the ceremonial law, but the weightier matters of God's moral law remain (Westminster Confession, ch. 19). The partakers of the Lord's Supper are now responsible before God to "examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord's body, of their faith to feed upon Him, of their repentance, love, and new obedience; lest coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves" (Shorter Catechism, # 97).

Paul requires the same thing of the partaker of the Lord's Supper that was required of the partaker of the Passover in the Old Testament. There are some differences, obviously, between the Old Testament sacrament and the New Testament sacrament. But the spiritual aspects of the meals are the same and Paul insists throughout the book of First Corinthians that those spiritual aspects be acknowledged. This is not an ordinary meal, but a sacramental meal which points beyond itself. Paul requires that we understand that there is a spiritual significance to the meal and that we be able to understand what the spiritual significance is.

Just as the unrepentant were disqualified from the Passover, they are also disqualified from the Lord's Supper. Just as the uncircumcised were disqualified from the Passover, the unbaptized are disqualified from the Lord's Supper. Just as the uncatechized were disqualified from the Passover, they are also disqualified from the Lord's Supper. Partakers must be able to examine themselves and in order to do that they must have a reasonable understanding of God's law.

In the Old Testament, a priest was required for the examination due to his specialized knowledge of the law of God. Today we are to examine ourselves by the same standard. Such examination presupposes a knowledge of the law and the ability to apply it properly. In short, it requires previous catechetical instruction.

This should not be used as a discouragement to the young children in the church. Rather, it should be an encouragement to them to learn and properly apply the means that God has given for holy living. "But the man that is clean, and is not in a journey, and forbeareth to keep the Passover, even the same soul shall be cut off from among his people: because he brought not the offering of the Lord in his appointed season, that man shall bear his sin" (Numbers 9:13). It is not simply desirable to partake of the sacrament, it is as important as is baptism (Genesis 17:14). Avoiding the sacramental meal does not avoid judgment.

Our children should be encouraged to partake in their appointed season. When the child has learned enough to make a good confession he should fear God and partake of the meal. But how does a session know that the child is truly confirmed in the faith (the session does not confirm, but acknowledges the confirmation of the child)? The answer is that the child must exhibit an understanding of what it is to partake of the sacrament worthily. To the parents of such children, this means catechize, catechize, catechize your children. To the children of the Church this means catechize, catechize, diligently catechize and ask until you understand the answer to the question, "What mean ye by this service?"

On the basis of the Shorter Catechism (# 97), just as adults in the church do, the children should continue to ask themselves these four questions:

(1) Am I a believer?

(2) Do I judge my actions by God's law?

(3) Do I love God and my neighbor?

(4) Am I dealing with the sin that God has revealed?

These are the issues of life and it is to these very issues that the Lord's Supper calls each of us: "It is required of them that would worthily partake of the Lord's Supper, that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord's body, of their faith to feed upon him, of their repentance, love, and new obedience; lest, coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves" (Shorter Catechism, # 97).

  Chapters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Page Last Updated: 01/10/08 02:17:14 PM