I am not brand new to the Reformed Faith but am definitely not seasoned yet.

My wording may be elementary here...but...
Can someone explain to me why when speaking of covenantal continuance (??) circumcision is replaced by baptism and Passover by the Lord's Supper BUT only baptism transfers to children. This is a struggle our family is discussing at the moment. It seems that Paedobaptism should go hand in hand with Paedocommunion as Credobaptism goes hand in hand with Credocommunion. Children in the OT were not excluded from the passover meal but participants why does this same participation not apply to the Lord's Supper?
2nd question...is there a reformed denomination that holds to both paedo baptism and communion and the confessions, other than the CREC???
Good answers have been given, but I'm fool enough to add my
Grammatically, baptism and circumcision are both stated in the passive. One
is baptized, or one
was circumcised. The act was performed upon them. As for the objection that baptism requires participation, please see Romans 4 where it is clear that participation was required in circumcision as well (belief in the God who justifies apart from works, and trust in his promise, circumcision of the heart (repentance), etc.). Thus, Paul was baptized, and Cornelius was baptized etc.
However, grammatically, the Passover and the Holy Supper both require active participation: take and eat. These are active imperatives. They are not framed as "be given, and be fed". They require active participation, whereas the initiating signs don't.
Also, in Exodus 12, the child asked his father "‘What do you mean by this service?’". In other words, the child frames the question as an outsider to the participation. What do
you mean? Not, what do
we mean.
Again, in chapter 12, the stranger who wants to participate is given the following rule:
Exodus 12:47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover to the LORD, let
all his males be circumcised, and then
let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. 49 One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you.”
So, all of his males are circumcised (the rite of initiation), but only he partakes. This is the law for all covenant children, and for those converted to the faith. Anywho, you get the point. Even if we concede that the Passover is "replaced" by the Holy Supper, it does not logically follow that paedo-pushers are right.
I read these passages to some CREC-types once, only I replaced the words "What do you mean" with "What do we mean", and they started celebrating. Then I promptly informed them that the text actually says "what do you mean", and they began to shamefully backpedal.
FORC is quasi-confessional and paedocommunion. My father-in-law ministers in a church of the FORC in Virginia.
Cheers,