this week in class we talked about the sacraments and luther's understanding of the sacraments. the discussion that i found especially meaningful had to do with infant baptism and then what it meant for communion. all of this is also in the context of two adorable kids i've been blessed to interact with the last few weeks at my ministry-in-context (mic) site.
this past sunday, one of the children (maybe 5 years old) came up for the children's sermon. at my mic site the baptismal font is at the front of the church so that we pass it as we come up for communion. the font has a fairly good sized clear bowl (with high sides) holding an inch or two of water. as the child came up, he reached up on his tippiest of tip toes and reached down, just barely reaching the water with the tip of his finger. after dipping it in the water, he brought his hand to his own forehead and made the sign of the cross on his forehead!
each week that i have helped with communion, one child (about 3 years old) continuously comes up for communion with her mom. the pastor blesses her and she holds out her hands expectantly and her mom, after receiving a piece of bread from the pastor breaks her bread in two and gives a piece to her daughter. the child is so eager for communion, but has to receive it through her mother rather than directly from the pastor!
the child remembering his baptism pointed to two things for me: 1-kids get the sacraments way more than we give them credit for (and, perhaps, way more than adults like me do!), and 2-we need more water in that font!! each time the other child comes up for communion, i am reminded also that kids get the sacraments in ways many of us adults don't and i question what she is being taught as she has to receive communion by way of her mom.
luther argued for infant baptism for a variety of reasons. jesus tells his disciples to baptize all in his name an children are part of that all. also, baptism has been practiced from the beginning of christianity and infant baptism has lasted for so long that it can't be a heresy. if it were a heresy, the holy spirit would've conveyed that by now and we would've stopped doing it. god blessed children and has accomplished great things in and with them, so why shouldn't we trust god to work in them through baptism? also, and one of the most compelling reasons for me, infant baptism affirms that we as humans don't contribute to baptism. it's all god. god's grace, not our effort, work, or initiative.
this then raised the question: why don't we do infant eucharist as well? if we trust god to work in baptism, why don't we trust god to work in eucharist? growing up, my family was the god family for another family's two kids and i distinctly remember at their baptism the priest (they were episcopal) telling as all that the candidates for baptism, following their baptism were welcome to come and receive communion as well. baptism into christ's death and resurrection - baptism into the body of christ; followed almost immediately by communion, christ's body broken for all of god's people.
when a child comes to me with hands open eager to receive communion, i will have a really, really hard time not just giving it to them. no matter what i will seek out a conversation with their parent(s)/guardians as soon as possible. if we deny children communion, are we not denying christ as well? are we not denying god's power and grace? i can't help remember my sermon from christ the king sunday last week: christ frees us to encounter christ in everyone everywhere. christ frees us to encounter christ in the least of these. if children are not the least of these, i don't know who is. communion is at christ's table and we are just recipients: god gives we receive, who are we to try to control god?
No comments:
Post a Comment