Go to the index of other articles to do with Baptismal Integrity.
Go to John's Brinkster Home Page.

Update 50 pages 12-13.

Communion before Confirmation

A report on proposals before the General Synod of the C of E.
 

According to its law (Canon B 15 A), the Church of England may give holy communion to those who:
    (a) are confirmed or are ready and desirous to be confirmed, or
    (b) are communicant members of other Trinitarian churches, or
    (c) are baptised and qualify under regulations which General Synod might make, or
    (d) are baptised and in immediate danger of death.

When the law was drafted General Synod hadn’t made any regulations, but in 1991 three dioceses in the Church of England were given permission to experiment with admitting unconfirmed children to communion, and the practice was soon alive and growing. The 1994 report “On the Way” asked churches to explore initiation policies including communion before confirmation, and in 1996 the House of Bishops issued “Guidelines” (GS Misc 488).

The guidelines permitted churches to explore the nature of the sacrament and the question of who should receive, including children. They allowed the bishop to decide whether to have a scheme under which individual parishes could apply to admit children to communion. They insisted that the child be baptized, but they to say how old the child should be: “his/her appreciation of the significance of the sacrament” was more important than his/her age. A register should be kept and certificates issued. Perhaps most significantly, the guidelines said (para J): “No baptized person, child or adult, who has once been admitted to Holy Communion and remains in good standing with the church should be anywhere deprived of it”, so when a family moves elsewhere the children must be admitted to communion in their new church.

The guidelines were debated and approved by General Synod, and published in 1997. As a result communion before confirmation spread, and in 2000 General Synod requested the bishops to “continue to monitor the implementation of its guidelines, and to report back by 2005 with a recommendation about whether changes in canon law are required as a result of developing practice and understanding.”

So it was no surprise that a report came back to General Synod. But it’s contents were a surprise. It said that the House of Bishops was wrong to issue “guidelines” based on the idea that children were on the way to being confirmed and therefore fell under the “ready and desirous” clause of the canon. In fact they clearly weren’t ready, otherwise they’d be confirmed. So scrap the guidelines, and get Synod to make regulations.

It’s hard to summarise all the nuances of the two General Synod debate, in July and November. On the whole, most members felt the practice of admitting churchgoing children to communion should continue. There were, however, some notable exceptions, and the report was very flimsy on the question of statistics to show that this practice helped retain children within the churches. You couldn’t help feeling that a basic question had been ducked: is communion before confirmation really the single issue which keeps children on board, or is good youth work in general the real factor? There were figures about how many churches operated the system, but none on how much lively youth work incorporated it and how much eschewed it. One speaker spelled out several major difficulties which gave him grave doubts about the whole thing.

In November, July’s promise (made in response to my speech) of a more detailed report investigating such questions failed to materialize. The Synod was now being asked to approve the regulations. The Bishop of Rochester asked if we were overturning the Anglican pattern of Baptism - Confirmation - Communion in that order? Although Synod voted overwhelmingly to approve the regulations (they now go to the “committee stage”), there were many unhappy comments made in speeches.

But coming home and reading the report at more leisure, I think I’ve discovered how the Bishop of Rochester’s question can be answered. The proposed regulations abandon the stance that no-one who has once been admitted can ever be denied. Instead they say (para 10) “A child who presents (a certificate) shall be admitted at any service of Holy Communion ...” - but do you see the difference? A child not any person. In other words, if the child grows into adulthood but isn’t confirmed, the admission to communion lapses.

One friend of mine says all this is irrelevant. There are, after all, many unconverted adults who have been confirmed and now take communion - for instance at Christmas midnight services. But I think the question of the confirmed unbelievers is a separate issue. Part of the basis for admitting baptised children to communion is, supposedly, the doctrine that baptism is “full sacramental initiation” - which leads to the belief that confirmation is a purely pastoral rite and not part of initiation. But the BEM document insists that paedobaptist churches like ours should ensure that those baptized in infancy should express their faith in public when of an age to do so. By time-limiting the admission of children to communion the bishops have signified that confirmation is still important, and I am very pleased about that.

Go to the index of other articles to do with Baptismal Integrity.
Go to John's Brinkster Home Page.

This web page was last updated on 22nd January 2006.