Shane I believe you are totally correct! My thoughts exactly.

Thanks, Jordan, for the kind words.

I am not an advocate of paedocommunion. But I know that paedocommunionists use this interpretation of the text, which I agree is the correct interpretation, in favor of their position.

If anti-paedocommunionists, like me, are going to make a compelling case for our position, then we need to step up to the plate and do it.

What I think we need to avoid in this debate is a biblicistic appeal to a single text of scripture or even to a series of texts. Our theological system as a whole should be brought to bear on the issue of paedocommunion because–whether we are for it or against it–it’s going to have an affect on our system of theology beyond the narrow question of sacramentology.

It is this understanding of 1 Corinthians 11 that can open the door for people to reconsider paedocommunion in the reformed world. I do believe it needs to be reconsidered and it just takes looking at the text in it’s context the way that you do in this post. This is, after all, the most important text of the discussion (on both sides). We should not be hogging the bread and wine excluding our children the way the Corinthians were bogarting the bread and wine in their days excluding those who might have showed up a little later than they.. different circumstances, same sin.

Thanks again for this.

Indeed, there are other ways of taking the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner. I plan on following up with another post that explores whether self-examination may be applied more broadly. I think it can be. But I do want to raise some concerns about how that has been done. In fact, I will try to demonstrate how some approaches to self-examination work at cross purposes with the nature of the Lord’s Supper. Stay tuned.

So then the principle would be that we avoid taking the supper in ways that undermine its nature and purpose, examining ourselves to make sure we aren’t doing that.