[ theologia ]
Theologia Cross Logo
Apologetics Bible Church History Miscellaneous Sacraments Soteriology Sermons Worship

John Calvin & Paedocommunion

by Mark Horne

Copyright © 2002

John Calvin writes in the Institutes about the possibility of admitting children to the Lord’s Supper by virtue of their baptism once and only once:

At length they object, that there is not greater reason for admitting infants to baptism than to the Lord’s Supper, to which, however, they are never admitted: as if Scripture did not in every way draw a wide distinction between them. In the early Church, indeed, the Lord’s Supper was frequently given to infants, as appears from Cyprian and Augustine, (August. ad Bonif. Lib. 1;) but the practice justly became obsolete. For if we attend to the peculiar nature of baptism, it is a kind of entrance, and as it were initiation into the Church, by which we are ranked among the people of God, a sign of our spiritual regeneration, by which we are again born to be children of God, whereas on the contrary the Supper is intended for those of riper years, who, having passed the tender period of infancy, are fit to bear solid food.

This distinction is very clearly pointed out in Scripture. For there, as far as regards baptism, the Lord makes no selection of age, whereas he does not admit all to partake of the Supper, but confines it to those who are fit to discern the body and blood of the Lord, to examine their own conscience, to show forth the Lord’s death, and understand its power. Can we wish anything clearer than what the apostle says, when he thus exhorts, “Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup?” (1 Cor. 11: 28.) Examination, therefore, must precede, and this it were vain to expect from infants. Again, “He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” If they cannot partake worthily without being able duly to discern the sanctity of the Lord’s body, why should we stretch out poison to our young children instead of vivifying food? Then what is our Lord’s injunction? “Do this in remembrance of me.” And what the inference which the apostle draws from this? “As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” How, pray, can we require infants to commemorate any event of which they have no understanding; how require them to “show forth the Lord’s death,” of the nature and benefit of which they have no idea? Nothing of the kind is prescribed by baptism. Wherefore, there is the greatest difference between the two signs. This also we observe in similar signs under the old dispensation. Circumcision, which, as is well known, corresponds to our baptism, was intended for infants, but the Passover, for which the Supper is substituted, did not admit all kinds of guests promiscuously, but was duly eaten only by those who were of an age sufficient to ask the meaning of it, (Exod. 12: 26.) Had these men the least particle of soundness in their brain, would they be thus blind as to a matter so very clear and obvious?” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 16, Section 30)

So wrote John Calvin. Why are so many people in the Reformed heritage finding themselves in disagreement with him?

Other reasons could be added, but this hopefully will give readers initial reasons why they should reconsider Calvin’s position on the issue, and why doing so need not constitute a rejection of the entire legacy of the great Reformer. Surely Calvin would want his intellectual heirs to follow what Jesus tells us in the Bible rather than his own writings.

Copyright © 2002




  1. You would be interested to know that paedocommunion is making an entry among anti-paeodbaptists in the wake of a growing interest in celebrating The Lord’s Supper as Passover.

    Comment by Mr. Buck — April 27, 2010 @ 12:58 pm

  2. you really got to have more arguments

    Comment by keke — January 12, 2011 @ 12:05 pm

  3. Pr. Horne, aside from 4.16.30, where else does Calvin address p-comm? Also, I’ve been listening to Ken Gentry’s response to you on p-comm. Have you two ever met and buried the hatchet?

    Comment by tim prussic — March 10, 2012 @ 11:56 pm

  4. A question, if you don’t mind.
    Do those who practice paedocommunion excommunicate their children who do not profess faith by the time they reach the age of emancipation?
    Thank you for your response.

    Comment by Doug Brode — September 20, 2013 @ 5:52 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment