Best Confession for our reforming Church

Status
Not open for further replies.

Porter

Puritan Board Freshman
LBCF of 1689, to be sure. And the baptized version of the Westminster Shorter Catechism.
 

Particular Baptist

Puritan Board Freshman
Perhaps our church, and myself, are more of a congregationalist church which practices credobaptism but yet allows both paedos and credos into membership and even into leadership.
 

DAW

Puritan Board Freshman
Savoy Declaration. If you are Reformed and congregational in polity, the Savoy is just the ticket.

Because I am a Congregationalist, I hold to covenant baptism. Baptizing the infant child of a believer does not invalidate the believer's baptism of someone else. As long as we agree that neither baptism regenerates an individual, then both views should be practiced and respected in a non-Baptist church
 

Willem van Oranje

Puritan Board Junior
Honestly, I've had the discussion about who would be allowed to be ordained as elders or deacons. I guess we're too open on the issue of baptism, but we believe that it is best if a church has only one practice of baptism. However, I think that to say that because someone else disagrees with me on baptism, that therefore makes them inadmissable to the church community. Coming from a Baptist standpoint, or perhaps this is more congregational than baptist, I view those who should be members of the local church as those who are visible saints, who show signs of regeneration, regardless of their view of baptism. I would rather allow than exclude those who, though I don't believe have been biblically baptized, show clear signs of regeneration and visible sainthood.

Also, I've discussed the issue of church officers with my pastor, and we both believe that a paedo should be allowed to be an elder on the grounds that he doesn't baptize children, since this is the stance of the church, and that he doesn't create a schism with his belief. This has given me many headaches, but I have to say that if John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, or John Owen were to desire to join the local church that I attend, I could not disallow them to do so. And, I would have no problem with them being elders, if they subscribed to a similar policy such as you have laid our, Austin.

To a paedo-baptist, neglecting the baptism of his children is a "great sin", as the Westminster Confession of Faith puts it. They then cite this verse:

Exodus 4:24-26 24 And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him. 25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. 26 So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.

Surely you wouldn't want to be a part of this by encouraging a paedo-baptist to go against his conscience, would you? Better to bar them from eldership, then to admit to eldership on condition that they do not present their children for baptism.
 

DAW

Puritan Board Freshman
Most definitely. Go to the web site of the Reformed Congregational Fellowship, WordPress › Error and see.

Also, the Conservative Congregational Christian Conference, Home regularly distributes the Savoy Declaration (1658) and the Cambridge Platform (1648). through its FORESEE Publications.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top