View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2008, 12:46 PM
sastark's Avatar
sastark sastark is offline.
Puritanboard Junior
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,335
Thanks: 145
Thanked 77 Times in 60 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie View Post
Quote:
2. When I asked the OPC elders how I should consider a baby that has died after baptism but before they have displayed any fruits of repentance or faith, the answer was, "we should assume that this child is saved." This is the most consistent and systematic version of paedobaptism, as I presently understand. To me, this contains the vestiges of popery. We are imparting the covenant, rather than God laying His guarantee upon it with the sealing in the Spirit. I simply cannot accept this model, in light of God's sovereignty.
That is presumptive regeneration; other Presbyterians do not hold such a position. The balanced Presbyterian view is that we expect covenant children - through diligent use of the means of grace - to keep the way of the Lord, however, we do not presume anything. The child is to be warned of the dangers of covenant breaking, and urged to embrace Christ as He is freely offered in the gospel.
I'm sure I'm opening a but...

So, you would tell a grieving parent that we really can't speak to the eternal state of their dead child? This may seem like I'm playing the "emotional manipulation card", but I think it is a very applicable question to ask: pastors have to deal with this exact sort of situation.

I tend to agree with the Canons of Dordt on this, as quoted by Richard.