Phillip, I completely understand your misunderstanding on this.
I want to be very clear because you are equating some things as coextensive with others that ought not to be.
First, Maranatha Community Church is a true church. There are three marks of a true church. I know you know them, but you are extrapolating them out further than the marks require.
The WCF says that neglecting the baptism of some people is a great sin. I said it that way in particular. In other words, the neglect of baptizing children or infants is a great sin. It is not a damning sin, nor does it discount the idea behind the formulary of the three marks.
Baptism itself (i.e. the administration of the SACRAMENT in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and with water) is part of the threefold designation of a true church. Maranatha has baptized people that should not have been baptized. So have churches I have been in. Ultimately they become God-haters and leave the church. But that does not make the baptism itself invalid. (It actually, for them, seals their condemnation.) In the same way, the infant itself, or whether you have or not have baptized an infant, does not make the sacrament ITSELF invalid, or deter us from deeming your church a true church.
This is an important point. So don't confuse that.
On the second point, unlawfully ordained men can unlawfully administer the sacrament. But that does not make the sacrament invalid in the same way Calvin argued for accepting RC baptism in HIS DAY. Until a church is deemed "apostate", we would accept their baptism as it stand under the three marks of a true church.
When we say that baptism is rightly administered as under the three marks, we are talking about formulary, and water. We are not talking about subjects (unless of course you wanted to baptize your dog, then there would be problems).
A Baptist church could be schismatic (bene-esse problem) while being a true church (esse).
You can't confuse government (which also includes lawful ordination) with the marks of a true church - all those who profess true religion.
Quote:
|
If what you have written is true, then how can any non-Presbyterian church and any non-Presbyterian minister be part of the true church.
|
The church may be a true church, though the minister is not a lawfully ordained minister. He may be part and parcel of the church, but is engaging in a sinful practice.
Does that help clarify?
[Edited on 9-27-2005 by webmaster]