In this lecture, Mark Dever explains John Bunyan's view of why credo baptists and paedo baptists could be members of the same church, and argues why such a view is wrong. While I disagree with Mr. Dever's arguments, it was interesting to hear exactly where consistent Baptist sacramentology and radical Congregationalist ecclesiology (democracy in the church) leads:

SermonAudio.com - John Bunyan: Puritan Baptist

I recommend that people on both sides of the baptism debate listen to this lecture, and soberly think about where the logic of their position is leading them.

He did make one point about Presbyterians arguing that Baptists are trying to over-purify the church which I thought was valid, as he points out that we only admit professors to the Lord's Table. Yet, it could be argued that we do this because someone has to understand what they are doing in actively partaking of the Lord's Supper, and so they are not admitted on any presumption of regeneration.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

It's late right now, but I'm going to listen to that.

__________________
Dan Pemberton
Vacaville, CA

Member, First Baptist Church San Luis Obispo
Formerly ABUSA (We left, so I guess that makes us American Baptists Unleashed!)

I listened to this message some time ago a couple of times. As for me, I think Bunyan had the right attitude and spirit about this matter. Twelve years in prison could teach a man a lot about love, mercy, forgiveness and thankfulness unto God which is evident by the writings of Bunyan especially "the Pilgrims Progress". While I am a baptist with a little "b", I am not about to argue and break fellowship with a brother in Christ over a secondary issue that has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. I know some of the brethren from both sides of this issue make disagree but I think Bunyan had it right. God bless you all.

__________________
1689 Baptist Confession

Psa 55:16 As for me, I will call upon God; and the LORD shall save me.
Psa 55:17 Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.
James Farley, Wilderness Road Baptist Assembly.
Husband of Melissa and father of Ann.
www.wildernessroadbaptist.org

I take a Presbyterian version of Bunyan's view; in that, I think Baptists should be members in Presbyterian churches, and I believe that the WCF 26:2 necessitates this.

This is worth the time to read:

Differences in Judgment about Water Baptism, No Bar to Communion

DIFFERENCES IN JUDGMENT ABOUT WATER BAPTISM, NO BAR TO COMMUNION:
OR,
TO COMMUNICATE WITH SAINTS, AS SAINTS, PROVED LAWFUL.
IN ANSWER TO A BOOK WRITTEN BY THE BAPTISTS, AND PUBLISHED BY MR. T. PAUL AND MR. W. KIFFIN, ENTITLED, 'SOME SERIOUS REFLECTIONS ON THAT PART OF MR BUNYAN'S CONFESSION OF FAITH, TOUCHING CHURCH COMMUNION WITH UNBAPTIZED BELIEVERS.'
WHEREIN THEIR OBJECTIONS AND ARGUMENTS ARE ANSWERED, AND THE DOCTRINE OF COMMUNION STILL ASSERTED AND VINDICATED. HERE IS ALSO MR. HENRY JESSE'S JUDGMENT IN THE CASE, FULLY DECLARING THE DOCTRINE I HAVE ASSERTED.
BY JOHN BUNYAN.
'Should not the multitude of words be answered? and should a man full of talk be justified? should thy lies make men hold their peace? and when thou mockest, shall no man make thee an answer [unashamed?]'—Job 11:2, 3
London: Printed for John Wilkins, and are to be sold at his shop in Exchange Alley, next door to the Exchange Coffee House, over against the Royal Exchange, 1673.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Courteous Reader,

Be intreated to believe me, I had not set pen to paper about this controversy, had we been let alone at quiet in our Christian communion. But being assaulted for more than sixteen years, wherein the brethren of the baptized way, as they had their opportunity, have sought to break us in pieces, merely because we are not, in their way, all baptized first: I could not, I durst not, forbear to do a little, if it might be, to settle the brethren, and to arm them against the attempts, which also of late they begin to revive upon us. That I deny the ordinance of baptism, or that I have placed one piece of an argument against it, though they feign it, is quite without colour of truth. All I say is, That the church of Christ hath not warrant to keep out of their communion the Christian that is discovered to be a visible saint by the word, the Christian that walketh according to his light with God. I will not make reflections upon those unhandsome brands that my brethren have laid upon me for this, as that I am a machivilian, a man devilish, proud, insolent, presumptuous, and the like, neither will I say as they, The Lord rebuke thee; Words fitter to be spoken to the devil than a brother. But reader, read and compare; lay aside prejudice and judge. What Mr. Kiffin hath done in the matter I forgive, and love him never the worse, but must stand by my principles because they are peaceable, godly, profitable, and such as tend to the edification of my brother, and as I believe will be justified in the day of judgment.

I have also here presented thee with the opinion of Mr. Henry Jesse, in the case, which providentially I met with as I was coming to London to put my papers to the press; and that it was his judgment is asserted to me, known many years since to some of the Baptists, to whom it was sent, but never yet answered; and will yet be attested if need shall require. Farewell.

Thine in all Christian service, according to my light and power,

JOHN BUNYAN.

I believe Piper had some diaglogue with Wayne Grudem about something like this last year. Apparently, Grudem had reversed his previous position that credos and paedos should be able to worship together in the same church. Piper was in favor of allowing paedos to be members of his church.

__________________
Mike Shingler
Pastor: Steep Hollow Baptist Church (SBC)
Bryan, TX

Martyn Lloyd-Jones was at least sympathetic to Bunyan's view, too.

Incidentally it is because Bunyan took this view that I chose him for my avatar.

__________________
In Christ's love and service

Mr. Tim Cunningham, Dip. CS (Regent College)
Member, First Baptist Church
Vancouver, BC

------------
"The Reformation was a time when men went blind, staggering drunk because they had discovered, in the dusty basement of late medievalism, a whole cellar of 1500-year-old, 200 proof grace—a bottle after bottle of pure distillate of Scripture, one sip of which would convince anyone that God saves us single-handedly. The word of the gospel—after all these centuries of trying to lift yourself into heaven by worrying about the perfection of your own bootstraps—suddenly turned out to be a flat announcement that the saved were home-free before they started. Grace was to be drunk neat: no water, no ice, and certainly no ginger ale." – Robert Farrar Capon

From the Baptist point of view especially Bunyan was wrong, and IMO he was wrong in general. Baptism has always been seen as preceding church membership and coming to the Lord's Supper by paedo and credo alike, but Bunyan disagreed, arguing that a profession of faith was all that was required. Bunyan's charity toward all was laudable, but I don't find the argumentation convincing. If the PB is any indication, increasingly, some baptists today, especially Calvinistic ones, agree with Bunyan, largely because they want to avoid the "odious consequences" of close communion, etc. described by Dabney here .

Those who drafted the 1689 London Baptist Confession were strongly opposed to Bunyan's views.

__________________
Chris Poe--Attending Grace Community Baptist Church, Mandeville, LA

"There never was a man in the world without a creed. What is a creed? A creed is what you believe. What is a confession? It is a declaration of what you believe. That declaration may be oral or it may be committed to writing, but the creed is there either expressed or implied."—B.H. Carroll

IMHO the views of the men who opposed John Bunyan seem to be the logical conclusin of a consistently Baptistic view of the sacraments.

I think that's right. Remember, from our point of view Baptists joining Presbyterian churches have been validly baptized, although it may have been performed "irregularly" as some have put it. However, Presbys, Anglicans, etc. joining Baptist churches without being immersed do not have valid baptisms from the Baptist point of view. That is unless the Baptist is going to argue that immersion is not of the essence of baptism, which I believe contradicts every Baptist confession that has ever been drafted that addressed the issue.

At our church a Presbyterian in good standing in his chruch could and would be invited to partake of the Lord's supper but not join the assembly untill he was baptized by immersion. I guess that's as close to Bunyan as we would get. However, I, like Bunyan fear that this doctrine becomes and idol for some.

In my denomination the issue of whether or not Baptists should be members is a sore point; I say that if we allow them to partake of the Lord's Supper, then they should be recognised as church members.

Actually, I believe the issue is not immersion so much as profession of faith. Immersion, itself, is not the heart of the Baptist view of baptism, though it is involved. The more central issue is who is a proper subject of baptism.

To my baptist shame my Presbyterian brethren seem to show much more grace in this matter. I have often partook of the sacrement at an ARP church close by. Some of my baptist brethren won't let anyone who is not baptized by immersion partake and some if they are not part of "thier" group. Shamefull behaviour imo.

Those who exclude those who in their view do not have a valid baptism are only acting in accordance with their confession and historic Baptist practice, although the ones who won't commune those who weren't baptized in a church that is part of their group may have veered closer to Landmarkism. Maybe you are starting to see the light and will come over to the Presby side!

In my opinion, a position that allows presbys or anyone else to commune but bars them from church membership is inconsistent although it may be laudable for its charity. From a practical standpoint, I don't imagine too many convinced Presbys would join a Baptist church unless there were no sound Presby or other paedo options in the area. The same goes for convinced Baptists joining a Presbyterian church.

Lest someone think I'm cutting it too fine, well we Puritans are precisionists after all.

Iam not agree that i would be a shamefull behaviour, and i don't think it a matter of not being a part of their group. In our church (baptist evangelical), we also allowed presbyterian to join with the supper, but personally iam not totally agree with that. The baptist wanted to hold to the order, as God has showed it in His Word, namely repentance, baptism, memeber of the church and the lord's supper, this is accordingly to the baptist view on the NT nature of the Church. If you viewed infant spinkeling as a valid baptism, than i understand that you would have a problem with this, but if you don't view infant sprinkeling as a valid baptism, than it means that the are not baptized at all, so why would you not follow the order as God shows us in His Word, only for the sake of unity ? Why would separted baptism and Lord supper from eachother, only for the sake of fellowship ? I love my presbyterian brethern alot, and i love their fellowship, but i would not let their view on infant-sprinkeling have an influance on the ordinances of the local church, to seperated baptism and Lord's supper.

__________________
* Ralph Wilms (7-10-1974)
* Church : Christengemeente Roermond (The Netherlands)
* Credobaptist who hold towards Covenant Theology
* Husband of Reena & father of Naomie and Gideon
* 1729 Goat Yard Declaration of Faith
* 1646 & 1689 Baptist Confession of faith
* 1595 The Lambeth Articles
* 1618-1619 The Canons of Dordt

Some pertinent quotes.An article on Spurgeon's position that I thought was good and agree with is found here

Don Witney has a good article here

__________________
For the Glory of our King,
Joe Johnson
Married up in 1988 and blessed with two wonderful sons
TMS graduate
Preacherboy at Cornerstone Community Church, Escanaba, MI
http://www.SoundLife.org

And that's where some of us baptists see the presby postion as inconsistant. If you is baptized, even if it is a child, how can you bar them from the table? Yes we can be hiar splitters sometimes can't we.