…walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
Ephesians 4.1-7
The divide between Baptists and paedobaptists is a great one, and can seem to be an insurmountable one. A simple perusal of the baptism forum at puritanboard.com demonstrates that there is often much passion, even animosity, in debate over this issue. This is ironic, considering that there are few groups within the Church that are closer in their distinctives than Reformed Baptists and conservative Presbyterian and Reformed folk. It is a sad fact that some Presbyterian sessions have allowed Baptist ministers to preach from their pulpits, but refused them table fellowship. Sadder still is the case where a person baptized as an infant but who has a credible profession of faith and demonstrates the fruit of being united to Christ is refused membership in a credobaptist church unless they are rebaptized, as if the doors to the historical church should be narrower than the doors to the invisible one. This seems to indicate a profound misunderstanding of the nature of the church and her sacraments.
In his letter to the Ephesian church, St. Paul calls his audience to a life that is consistent with their holy calling, that they should be humble, be patient and understanding with one another, and do all that is in their power to maintain the unity wrought by the Holy Spirit, being bound together in peace. He give them a reason for this, for they they have the same Creator, the same hope, the same Spirit in them, the same faith, the same Lord, the same signs. Are we to believe by this that there were no differences among them? Surely not. If it were the case that they had no disagreement on anything, the admonishment to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace would be unnecessary. Paul appeals to what they do have in common to remind them that sources of disagreement pale in comparison to what truly binds them together.
What are we to make, then, of the fact that Paul states that there is “one baptism?” We have two options in light of this. We can say that one side of the church, either paedo or credo, has no baptism at all. This is the position of a certain Reformed professor of theology that I am aware of, who teaches alongside Baptists but claims that their churches are not true churches. This is also the position of those who would deny the Lord’s Supper to those who were not baptized at what they would understand to be the right time in their lives. Consider how this cuts off a limb from the Body of Christ. To claim a monopoly on “true baptism” arbitrarily denies the reality that the opposition really belongs to Christ. Our other option is to take a humble approach, and to say that while we disagree with the timing of our brothers’ baptism, we will humbly receive him as he is in truth, our brother.
I grant, that this is harder for the credobaptist than the paedo. But I hope that more of our Baptist brothers will follow the example of that godly Baptist John Piper, who holds firmly to his theological persuasion, and doesn’t fail to preach it, but also expresses a desire to admit those baptized as infants to membership in his congregation. Consider, after all, what baptism signifies. Our union to Christ, and therefore our union to one another in His body. Why would we make the timing of baptism the exact point of our division with so many? We deny the sign, and the thing signified, when we make such division. May God grant us grace to confess with our mouths that we have “one baptism,” and to actually live in light of that confession.
2 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
Gregory Soderberg
necdum videmus
tjsumpter
revjatb
Bryan Maes
aaroncummings
I agree compeletely, but reading it a question came to mind, since here in the church I attend, PCA< I was told that usually the Presbytery disciplines the believer who refuses to baptise the child, once he is member of the church. Is that true?
I’m no expert in the ins and outs of the PCA BCO, but I don’t think that the presbytery can discipline an individual member of a congregation, because they are not members of the presbytery. For the individual member, presbytery would serve only as a court of appeal. However, a local session could discipline someone for refusing to baptize their babies.
I know a PCA pastor in Texas that once explained that he would indeed ‘discipline’ a Baptist member of his congregation, but that discipline would take the form of frequent personal pastoral exhortations but would not jeopardize his table fellowship or membership.