Here is a larger quote from Morey's article:
Quote:
In our initial enthusiasm for covenant theology, we assumed naively that we could adopt this system without partaking of infant baptism. The Presbyterian covenant theologians told us that if we were going to be "Reformed" we must accept all of it or none of it. They could not see how we could refrain from accepting the system in its entirety.
Some of us, therefore, have entered into a phase in which we are wondering about in the wilderness without any system. Others in various traditions have experienced the same thing. Contemporary Reformed theologians have accused us of being dispensationalists because in their minds there are only two systems of thought for options. It must be understood clearly that Reformed theology has always assumed that there is a comprehensive theological system which can be discovered and expounded. That is why most systematic theologies are written by Calvinists!
Since many feel uncomfortable with both dispensationalism and covenant theology, the question arises, do we need a system? Must we carry on the quest which has been followed for centuries?
|
I identify myself with this quote. In my reading about CT it is always inexorably linked to paedobaptism. I believe the majority of CT's on the PB would concur. And yes, I've been called a dispensationalist because I am not a paedo. Of course, I dismiss that charge. While I like Morey's article I'm not ready to concede that a systematic theology is wrong. Scripture
is linked with scripture. There is a continuity from Genesis to Revelation. To deny this continuity is to take each passage of scripture as an independent revelation. It would be like calling each beam a house, even though it takes many beams to build a house. I don't believe Morey is arguing against the continuity of scripture as much as he has a bent against systematic theology.
Late me state for the record that
I do not believe a person is a dispensationalist if they reject WCF-CT and its insistence on paedobaptism. My WCF brethren may contest that claim but I contest it in return. I believe
it is possible to a CT, but a CT of a different persuasion. This is possible without being called NCT, or at least the NCT of John Reisinger. I state again that I believe our God to be a God of covenants. I would disagree with the WCF-CT in there understanding that paedobaptism is an inherent component of CT. How that makes me a dispensationalist, I don't understand.