Calvin on child communion

Calvin did not support child communion. I guess one of the reasons for this is his context: he was rejecting a certain type of Roman Catholicism in which understanding the Lord’s Supper was pretty irrelevant and unnecessary. As long as the priest said the hocus pocus it didn’t matter whether he understood it or not and if it was mumbo jumbo to the people. In reaction against this, he says:

… the chief thing which the Lord recommends to us, is to celebrate this mystery
with true intelligence….

(Calvin’s Theological Treatises, LCC edition, ‘Treatise on the Lord’s Supper’, p161)

This having been said, it is clear why Calvin would not be drawn to communion for children who do not have (adult) intelligence.

On the same page, Calvin very highly (and rightly) emphasizes the doctrinal aspect of the Supper.

… the devil introduced the manner of celebrating the Supper without any
doctrine…. the substance of it all consists in the doctrine…. … to such an
extent, that the mass, which takes the place of the Supper in the popish Church,
when strictly defined, is nothing but apishness and buffoonery…. the sacraments
take their virtue from the Word, when it is preached intelligibly…. For the
proper and chief substance of the Supper is lacking [in the mass], that the
mystery be well explained to the people, and the promises clearly recited,
instead of the priest muttering to himself apart without sense or reason.

Of course, while the doctrine is essential and important, so are the actions and the objects: you need to eat bread and drink wine to celebrate the Supper, as well as hear words, understand teaching and believe sermons, as Calvin of course would have said, though this quote might not make it sound too much like it.