How can we avoid the conclusion that infants should be admitted to the
Lord's Supper, if they are admitted to baptism?
The same reason and the same precedents do not hold in relation to
both sacraments. 1st. Baptism recognizes and seals church
membership, while the Lord's Supper is a commemorative act. 2d. In
the action of baptism the subject is passive and in that of the Lord's
Supper active. 3d. Infants were never admitted to the Passover until
they were capable of comprehending the nature of the service. 4th
The apostles baptized households, but never admitted households as
such to the Supper.
How may it be proved that the Lord's Supper is not designed for the unrenewed?
It can, of course, be designed only for those who are spiritually
qualified to do in reality what every recipient of the sacrament does
in form and professedly. But this ordinance is essentially--
1st. A profession of Christ
2d. A solemn covenant to accept Christ and his gospel, and to fulfil
the conditions of discipleship.
3d. An act of spiritual communion with Christ.
The qualifications for acceptable communion, therefore, are such
knowledge, and such a spiritual condition, as shall enable the
recipient intelligently and honestly to discern in the emblems the
gospel covenant, and to hold fellowship with him through the spirit.
