Ready to Share One Bread

Preparing Children For Holy Communion

Nick Harding

• Publisher: SPCK Publishing
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9780281070541
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Rituales cristianos y práctica

The Church of England has allowed the admission of baptised children to Holy Communion before confirmation since 1997 but currently only about 20% of parishes currently do so.
There is therefore much scope for many more churches to explore the issue and this book contains all a church would need to do so, including resources for exploring the issue with a whole congregation, case studies from real-life churches, a preparation course, an admission liturgy and advice on including and involving children in Eucharistic worship.
The book also includes theological reflection on children and the Eucharist from Michael Perham and considers the impact of receiving Holy Communion on children's discipleship.

PART 1

The story so far

1

Why it matters

A brief theology of children and the Eucharist

Michael Perham

‘Why can’t I have some?’

It is the question that clergy have heard over and over again at the altar rail. Fortunately for them, the question is more often posed to mum or dad rather than the priest. I’m always grateful for that, for I know no satisfactory answer to the question. If it would not cause pastoral confusion I would reply, ‘There is no reason why you can’t. Put out your hand. Jesus wants to feed you.’ If I’m honest, that’s what I most want to say to the adults who come to the altar, having been well instructed that, because they are not confirmed, they cannot be communicants and so bow their heads for a blessing. ‘Put out your hand. Jesus wants to feed you’ is something I would like to say almost every time I preside at the Eucharist. The fundamental issue is not so much about children as about all those whom we exclude from the Lord’s table.

But, of course, it is not as simple as that. I’m not sure the theology itself is very much more complicated. Jesus wanting to feed us is very fundamental. But certainly church practice has made it a good deal more complicated and we need to explore some of that if we are to find a more adequate answer to the question.

For the Church of England the move towards admitting children to Holy Communion really goes back to what is usually called ‘The Ely Report’. Properly titled Christian Initiation: Birth and Growth in the Christian Society,¹ it was produced by a commission chaired by Ted Roberts, then the Bishop of Ely, and published in 1971, more than 40 years ago. It was a seminal work and still shapes Church of England understanding of the relationship between baptism, confirmation and first communion. Not everything that it claims is accepted by every Anglican, or even every Anglican liturgist, but it has shaped both the creation of liturgical rites and ongoing pastoral practice for nearly two generations. At heart it teaches that baptism is complete initiation into the Christian community. There is nothing more that has to be done before a person is fully a member of the Church. The Ely Report summarizes its understanding of baptism in this way:

Baptism is the effectual sign of the union of the Church and thereby of the individual with Christ . . . This baptismal union with Christ is continually renewed and sustained by Holy Communion to which Baptism itself looks forward and for which it is the only sacramental prerequisite.

It goes on to recommend that ‘the Church should make explicit its recognition of baptism as the full and complete rite of Christian initiation’.

This leads the report to be clear that confirmation is not essentially part of Christian initiation. Instead it sees it as a pastoral rite and a declaration of mature Christian discipleship.

Confirmation has often been regarded in the past as in some cases the completion of Christian initiation. We believe that Confirmation signifies far more than an isolated rite important though that is; it is also a focal point in an on-going ministry of training. We propose that this vital element of training should now receive the widest possible recognition, and thus restore to Confirmation its true function of fostering the spiritual growth of the individual Christian. This on-going ministry should include admission to Communion where the circumstances warrant this at an earlier age than is normally considered normal.

The report thus makes admission to communion something separate from confirmation, or at least not necessarily attached to it. It goes on to set out some principles relating to admission to communion.

We believe that it should be permissible to admit baptised Christians to Communion after preparation without using Confirmation as some kind of a preliminary spiritual or educational qualification. As the right of Confirmation ceases to be no more than a conventional gateway to Communion, so its significance will be enhanced, as it becomes an act of personal commitment and commissioning at an age when such an act becomes truly meaningful.

Communion will now become a means of grace and strengthening for those involved in the Church’s on-going ministry of training, rather than a goal to be attained at the conclusion of a course of instruction. Every person, however, must be carefully prepared to receive the sacrament in accordance with his own capabilities.

First Communion should be an occasion of the greatest importance. It should be administered whenever possible by the bishop, thus ensuring for each newly admitted communicant direct contact with him.

Concerning admission to Communion, we recommend that:

1. It is permissible for the parish priest, at his discretion, to admit persons to Communion (if they so desire) who have been baptised with water in the name of the Trinity.
2. Adequate preparation for admission to Communion be provided and be such as to enable the candidates to participate in the Eucharist.
3. The first Communion be administered, wherever possible, by the bishop.

It took from 1971 to 1997, 26 years, for policy to turn into practice, and even then the new practice was by way of exception, with communion following confirmation remaining the norm, as it still is today. In 1996 the House of Bishops produced Guidelines, the General Synod endorsed them and they were issued in a revised form in 1997. With little difference the Guidelines were turned into Regulations in 2006.

It is worth, at this point, pausing to explore the practice of the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches, for they throw some light on Anglican understanding and practice. The Orthodox approach has a wonderful simplicity about it. Baptism includes anointing with the oil of chrism (which is regarded as the equivalent of the laying on of the bishop’s hand in Anglican confirmation). Baptism is regarded as complete initiation. The newly baptized, however young, is immediately eligible for Holy Communion and may receive it from a spoon. Nothing further is needed as part of a process of becoming fully a member of the Church. An Orthodox child does not, therefore, receive preparation or training to be a communicant, nor does such a child remember their first communion, any more than they remember their first meal at home. They grow up simply as a member of a community that eats and drinks together.

The position in the Roman Catholic Church is not so simple. Children are admitted to communion before confirmation, but confirmation is still regarded as a sacramental stage in an initiation process. Confirmation, which may be by a priest, rather than by the bishop, involves anointing with the oil of chrism consecrated by the bishop. There is a recognition that baptism makes a person, of whatever age, a complete member of the Church, but the Catechism teaches that confirmation ‘renders the bond with the Church more perfect’. There is no automatic granting of communicant status through baptism. Instead it comes, after preparation for first communion, usually at the age of seven or eight.

In many ways it seems that the Church of England, where it has admitted children to communion, has accepted the theology of the Orthodox Churches, but then adopted the practice of the Roman Catholic Church, with admission after preparation at the age of seven or eight as the norm.

It is now time to explore the 2006 Regulations. It is important to understand that first communion after confirmation remains the norm. Admission of children to communion is a permissible variant from the norm as expressed in the Book of Common Prayer and the canons, which enshrine the Church’s doctrine. Nevertheless, under the Regulations, a baptized child may be admitted to communion provided that:

• the bishop directs that the practice may extend to his diocese;
• the parish priest has applied to the bishop for one or more of his or her parishes for the parish to admit children to communion;
• the Parochial Church Council of the parish has resolved to support the application;
• the bishop is satisfied that there is sufficient preparation and provision for future nurture in place in the parish and that the parish will encourage the child later to come to confirmation;
• that the parents of the child are content that the child shall be admitted;
• that the admission to communion is recorded in a register and the child given written evidence of admission.

The House of Bishops’ Regulations do not specify at which age the child may be admitted, simply requiring the bishop to satisfy himself ‘that the parish concerned has made adequate provision for preparation and continuing nurture in the Christian life’. This lack of guidance about age does, inevitably, lead to greater confusion in the Church. First there is the variety of practice whereby some children are admitted to communion before confirmation and some are not. But second there is the variety whereby, in one diocese, they may be admitted as young as aged three or four, while in another it might be seven or eight. To that must be added the further confusion that, in some dioceses, an admission to communion policy has not altered the willingness of the bishop to confirm a child aged as young as nine or ten, while in another, where the policy is in place, confirmation is always delayed until sixteen or over as a kind of adult commissioning. The present position is something of a mess.

In order to try to bring some order out of this pastoral and liturgical chaos, we need to go back to the New Testament and the early centuries. But first it may be useful to reflect on how many of the Ely Report recommendations have been implemented and which have disappeared.

1. In general the understanding of baptism as complete initiation has been accepted.
2. While communion after confirmation remains the norm, baptism cannot be seen as consistently the ‘only sacramental prerequisite’ for communicant status.
3. The permissibility of admitting baptized Christians to communion after preparation without confirmation has been established, but not as the norm.
4. Liturgical presidency by the bishop of admission to communion has been firmly resisted (not least lest it become confused with confirmation), but the bishop’s involvement has been retained because the policy must have his approval and application to adopt it must be made to him.
5. There has been no great change in popular perception of confirmation. Its significance as an act of personal commitment and commissioning has not received fresh emphasis.
6. The Ely Report speaks consistently of admitting ‘baptized Christians’. Current regulations on admission to communion are restricted to baptized children, not adults.

So it is clear both that the 1971 Ely Report remains the foundation of much Church of England thinking, but that its intentions have not yet been fully realized. More significantly, the Church has still not made up its mind to detach admission to communion from confirmation, let alone to attach it firmly to baptism without any further requirements.

Both the Ely Report and the Bishops’ Regulations make much of ‘preparation’. They assume that reception of communion is not simply a matter of sharing naturally in the Church’s eucharistic meal, but requires preparation. The Ely Report calls it ‘training’. It is this that has led bishops to set the minimum age limit at something between the ages of four and eight. A child capable of learning at school is also capable of learning about eucharistic participation. But there is, of course, a question about whether sharing the Lord’s Supper is something that requires intellectual preparation. Clean hands and a pure heart might be sufficient.

Where might Scripture lead us? The teaching of Jesus does not resolve the matter for us. What it does do is to show that Jesus took children seriously and recognized that they are very much part of the kingdom of heaven.

In Mark 10.13–16 (which is reflected also in Matthew 19.13–15 and Luke 18.15–17), Jesus says:

People were bringing little children to [Jesus] in order that he might touch them; and the disciples spoke sternly to them. But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, ‘Let the little children come to me; do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it.’ And he took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.

‘Let the children come to me,’ says Jesus. It is not an explicit invitation to share in the Eucharist, though it is an affirmation of their place in the kingdom of God, and that kingdom is sometimes described as a place of feasting.

In the previous chapter Jesus has spoken about welcome. ‘Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all,’ he says.

Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, ‘Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.’

(Mark 9.36–37)

Again the context is not a meal, but the plea is for the welcome of children. And a few verses later, he adds:

If any of you put a stumbling-block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea.

(Mark 9.42)

The message is reinforced; nothing and nobody must keep a child from Jesus. But it is Matthew, rather than Mark, who in his account of the feeding of the five thousand makes the only explicit reference to Jesus feeding children.

All ate and were filled; and they took up what was left over of the broken pieces, twelve baskets full. And those who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.

(Matthew 14.20–21)

He says the same about the feeding of the four thousand (Matthew 15.38). It is John, in his a...

Table of contents

• Cover page
• Title page
• Imprint
• Table of contents
• Contributors
• Foreword
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part 1: The story so far
• Part 2: Preparing the ground
• Part 3: Preparing the people
• Part 4: Joining in
• Part 5: Carrying on
• Notes
• Further resources