Courtship/Marriage between Paedos and Credos

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kaalvenist

Puritan Board Sophomore
Any thoughts on the question of whether Reformed paedobaptists should court or marry Reformed credobaptists? (I view this as more of a question regarding courtship or marriage, rather than concerning baptism; that's why I put it in this forum.)
 

Coram Deo

Puritan Board Junior
Haha

:worms:

Any thoughts on the question of whether Reformed paedobaptists should court or marry Reformed credobaptists? (I view this as more of a question regarding courtship or marriage, rather than concerning baptism; that's why I put it in this forum.)
 

Backwoods Presbyterian

Puritanboard Amanuensis
I would not think this would fall under the heading of "unequally yolked". I certainly, when I get to the place where I can wed and give pre-marital counseling, would marry a couple with one credo and one paedo member as long as we talked through the issue and made sure that it was not a factor that would cause division later.

(I of course would try and counsel the credo member of the union as to his/her position)
 

servantofmosthigh

Puritan Board Freshman
Well, you'll have to discuss with her whether whichever one of you is the pedobaptist wants to baptize your children after marriage or whichever one of you is the credobaptist views that as heresy. =p
 

Gryphonette

Moderator
It largely would depend on the type of paedo involved.

Any thoughts on the question of whether Reformed paedobaptists should court or marry Reformed credobaptists? (I view this as more of a question regarding courtship or marriage, rather than concerning baptism; that's why I put it in this forum.)
One thing I've definitely noticed over the years by interacting with Presbyterianish folk is that there are quite a few variations on a paedobaptist theme, so to speak.

If the paedobaptist in question is one of the "baptism does so save, it says so right there in 1 Peter 3:21", then trying to pair off with a credobaptist is a serious mistake.

If, however, the paedobaptist thinks of baptism more as placing someone within the parameters of the visible church, then there's more hope that the two can either peacefully coexist, or - playing the odds of the way this tends to go - the credobaptist will move over to the paedobaptist's POV.
 

JBaldwin

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I agree with Michael :worms:

Here's why: If God should bless a marriage with children, there has to be a "united front" when it comes to raising the children. The issue of paedo vs. credo is an argument waiting to happen, especially if one of the two is firmly planted in their beliefs. It's a possible source of division that can cause trouble down the road.

What I have found in marriage is that when it comes to differences in raising children, the most ridiculous things can become a source of irriation. If you start off with a division as big as paedo-credo, you're asking for trouble. My :2cents:
 

ColdSilverMoon

Puritan Board Senior
Interesting. I agree with Backwoods Pres that it doesn't fall under unequally yoked, but I also agree with JBaldwin that it is a conflict waiting to happen, unless the wife understands the issue and agree beforehand that she will submit to her husband on the issue. I guess if it's something both are very passionate about and the the wife isn't willing to submit, then I don't see a reason to continue courtship, knowing that it will inevitably lead to major, potentially unresolvable contention.
 

Simply_Nikki

Puritan Board Junior
As a credo, I have no problem courting or marrying a paedo....

The children will probably just have to be baptized twice :smug:
 

Simply_Nikki

Puritan Board Junior
I was kidding hence the smirk.

On a serious note, I'm not sure, though I think I could probably submit to a paedo husband's stance on that issue. However, what if the children once adults wanted to be baptized again because they did not come to accept the position of paedo baptism? I've seen many adults do this, especially those who left the church and came back. Oh and why would it be blasphemy? :confused:

As a credo, I have no problem courting or marrying a paedo....

The children will probably just have to be baptized twice :smug:
But to the paedo husband, and the Reformed Paedos everywhere, that would be considered as blasphemous and a denial of their children's baptism (i.e. the original).
 

Reformed Covenanter

Puritanboard Commissioner
Any thoughts on the question of whether Reformed paedobaptists should court or marry Reformed credobaptists? (I view this as more of a question regarding courtship or marriage, rather than concerning baptism; that's why I put it in this forum.)
The only absolute qualification in courtship and marriage is that the other person is a Christian. Other things are a matter of prudence. However, if a woman is strongly paedo-baptist, then it is unwise of her to marry a man who is definitely Baptist, as she will have to submit to her husband's decision as to whether or not the children are to be baptised. But even in this case, we cannot forbid her from marrying the man if her father permits her.
 

JBaldwin

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Just for the record, before I met my husband, I dated a wonderful Christian man, and we had such a disagreement. We met in a reformed Baptist church, but I was studying paedo baptism at the time. It wasn't too long before I made the switch, and he couldn't agree. I knew I wasn't going to change my mind, so we broke it off.

Though I highly respect the views of my credo baptist brothers and sisters, if I had married (and we were discussing it seroiusly) I would have always felt like I was denying my convictions, and I'm sure it would have caused trouble later on.
 

Reformed Covenanter

Puritanboard Commissioner
Any thoughts on the question of whether Reformed paedobaptists should court or marry Reformed credobaptists? (I view this as more of a question regarding courtship or marriage, rather than concerning baptism; that's why I put it in this forum.)
The only absolute qualification in courtship and marriage is that the other person is a Christian. Other things are a matter of prudence. However, if a woman is strongly paedo-baptist, then it is unwise of her to marry a man who is definitely Baptist, as she will have to submit to her husband's decision as to whether or not the children are to be baptised. But even in this case, we cannot forbid her from marrying the man if her father permits her.
But if we can't biblically object to their marriage, how could her father? In other words, if we all know the facts, and there is nothing biblically prohibiting the two from marrying, neither we nor the father can ultimately (and legitimately) forbid the marriage, right? Sorry for this :offtopic: question.
I suppose what I mean is that her church's elders could not discipline her for marrying a Baptist, as it is the father's responsibility to decide whether or not such an marriage is wise and prudent. In my humble opinion, it is a sphere sovereignty issue, which the church has got no business to get involved in. Hope that helps.
 

Reformed Covenanter

Puritanboard Commissioner
Joshua, it may interest you to know that Mark Chanksi has a couple of good chapters on the father's role in courtship and giving in marriage in his book Manly Dominion. It wont be that long before boys are wanting to court your own daughter, so be prepared.
 

Southern Presbyterian

Puritan Board Doctor
But if we can't biblically object to their marriage, how could her father? In other words, if we all know the facts, and there is nothing biblically prohibiting the two from marrying, neither we nor the father can ultimately (and legitimately) forbid the marriage, right? Sorry for this :offtopic: question.
Biblically, the father is the head of the daughter until she is given in marriage, and if he sees this issue leading to future irreconcilable trouble in the marriage (after due consideration) I believe he can biblically deny his blessing. :2cents:

This would be a tough issue to weigh, as would be many others, and wise would be the couple who didn't weighing issues just because they would not be "unequally yoked".
 
Last edited:

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
If paedoism is error, then a credo wife need not submit to theological error.

If the wife thinks that this issue is cloudy, she may submit to the decision of her husband without compromising her views (which would be sin to do something she is convicted is not right)


If she cannot agree up front to her potential husband or if this issue is settled in her own mind, then wisdom would lead one to the conclusion that they should not marry.

If she marries a credo who turns paedo and she believes he is wrong, then she is faced with the tough decision of whether to submit to what seems blatant error or to stay true to the bible and oppose her husband. This issue is much harder.

There is no biblical prohibition against such a marriage, as long as both parties are Christian, but wisdom dictates that this all be factored in among other factors such as health, personality, childrearing beliefs, etc...
 

Reformed Covenanter

Puritanboard Commissioner
If paedoism is error, then a credo wife need not submit to theological error.
She need not agree with her husband on the issue, but even if she thinks he is wrong, she should not undermine his authority by vehemently disagreeing with him, but she can gently exhort him in a manner consistent with femine meekness.
 
Last edited:

Southern Presbyterian

Puritan Board Doctor
Biblically, the father is the head of the daughter until she is given in marriage, and if he sees this issue leading to future irreconcilable trouble in the marriage (after due consideration) I believe he can biblically deny his blessing. :2cents:
In my humble opinion, he would have to have specific biblical substantiation for his forbading. Why? Because if it's just a matter of personality, or his disapproval, say, of the suitor's lack of prestige or affluence, then the father could continue to object for as long as the daughter lives. Also, under the same cicrumstance, it seems, that an unregenerate father may do the same.

For what it's worth, I do think doctrinal questions, etc. serve as bibilcally legitimate reasons to forbid a courtship.
Exactly, and I was thinking specifically of the given situation of credo-pedo union. If we broaden this discussion to other issues then we will range very far :offtopic:. I was trying to stay within bounds of the OP yet still address your post. :handshake:

EDIT: If dad is playing his proper biblical role in courtship/dating then there would be no reason to forbid a wedding since he should have headed the whole situation off before marriage is even discussed. IHMO.
 

servantofmosthigh

Puritan Board Freshman
the issue is submission, not baptism

The issue, therefore, is not about whether pedos and credos can court and marry one another. The issue is: if both of them are adamant about their respective views, then the lack of submission will cause the courtship to not last long.
 

Gryphonette

Moderator
But she did specify ADULT children.

As long as they are under the headship of their Father, and according to the Father's paedo position, and the family's Paedo Church membership, it ought not be allowed.
My sister was baptized as an infant and raised in an Episcopalian church - as was I - but didn't come to faith until she was in college at Texas Tech, at which time she was baptized by the church she attended.

She says it was literally one of the happiest days of her life, and still is....right up there with her marriage and the births of her children.

I've never been baptized at Christ Chapel, but it's been more out of respect for my parents, who were pretty upset about my youngest sister being re-baptized.

Having been baptized back when I was four months old by unbelieving (my mother claims to be Christian, but trust me, she's not, while my father doesn't even make the claim any longer) parents in an apostate denomination isn't a baptism I take any pleasure in, to be honest. I'd love to be baptized at Christ Chapel.

Baptized by believing parents in a true church and actually raised in the faith and discipled (not just shuffled off to Sunday school and that's it as regards religious instruction) is one thing, but being baptized by unbelieving parents in an apostate denomination followed by no useful instruction so that one never heard the true gospel until one was in one's 40's isn't the same thing at all.

In any event, I don't think adult children who have presumably left their father's house and church should be expected to march to his drum beat.
 

ADKing

Puritan Board Junior
Biblically, the father is the head of the daughter until she is given in marriage, and if he sees this issue leading to future irreconcilable trouble in the marriage (after due consideration) I believe he can biblically deny his blessing. :2cents:
In my humble opinion, he would have to have specific biblical substantiation for his forbading. Why? Because if it's just a matter of personality, or his disapproval, say, of the suitor's lack of prestige or affluence, then the father could continue to object for as long as the daughter lives. Also, under the same cicrumstance, it seems, that an unregenerate father may do the same.

For what it's worth, I do think doctrinal questions, etc. serve as bibilcally legitimate reasons to forbid a courtship.

EDIT: Oh, deny his blessing. Sure. But he can't forbid the marriage, or call it sinful...I suppose that's what I'm getting at.
Thanks for saying this, Josh. As an overaction to the sinful license in our culture during dating/courtship (whatever term one prefers) some reformed people seem to have swung the pendulum too far the other direction. A goldy Christian father is not God. He should have grave reasons to attepmt to "forbid" a marriage. And even then, as you point out, all he can really do is deny his blessing. For a father to believe that his word suffices (sometimes without explanation!) is hardly the teaching of scripture. It is worth noting that in the reformed tradition, although minors were required to obtain permission to marry, those in their majority were to seek their father's blessing. If it were denied because a father was overscrupulous, obstinate, or whatever else that was not scriptural, the couple, with the blessing of the church could proceed to marriage anyway.

Just an :offtopic: plea for balance these days...
 

Reformed Covenanter

Puritanboard Commissioner
In any event, I don't think adult children who have presumably left their father's house and church should be expected to march to his drum beat.
Daughters are still required to honour him by seeking his blessing/permission regarding a prospective marriage partner.
 

Gryphonette

Moderator
Here's a bunny trail to hop down...

If someone is under his father's headship and care, is that one truly an adult?
 

Southern Presbyterian

Puritan Board Doctor
As long as they are under the headship of their Father, and according to the Father's paedo position, and the family's Paedo Church membership, it ought not be allowed.
My sister was baptized as an infant and raised in an Episcopalian church - as was I - but didn't come to faith until she was in college at Texas Tech, at which time she was baptized by the church she attended.

She says it was literally one of the happiest days of her life, and still is....right up there with her marriage and the births of her children.

I've never been baptized at Christ Chapel, but it's been more out of respect for my parents, who were pretty upset about my youngest sister being re-baptized.

Having been baptized back when I was four months old by unbelieving (my mother claims to be Christian, but trust me, she's not, while my father doesn't even make the claim any longer) parents in an apostate denomination isn't a baptism I take any pleasure in, to be honest. I'd love to be baptized at Christ Chapel.

Baptized by believing parents in a true church and actually raised in the faith and discipled (not just shuffled off to Sunday school and that's it as regards religious instruction) is one thing, but being baptized by unbelieving parents in an apostate denomination followed by no useful instruction so that one never heard the true gospel until one was in one's 40's isn't the same thing at all.

In any event, I don't think adult children who have presumably left their father's house and church should be expected to march to his drum beat.
I'm basically talking about those who are still under their Father's headship and care. An adult child? What is that? Oh wait! I'm one! :D
When does an unmarried daughter leave the headship of her father? 18, 21, when she gets a job and an apartment of her own?

Or, is this one of those "age of accountability" things?
 
Last edited:

ericfromcowtown

Puritan Board Sophomore
This is an interesting thread, as it hits close to home.

My wife was raised Pentecostal. I didn't become a Christian until I was an adult, but was attending a Reformed church when I met her and had come to accept infant baptism as a consistent and biblical position.

During premarital counselling our PCA pastor made sure that this was one of the topics we just didn't cross of a list but dealt with. I was impressed by our pastor's diplomatic handling of the issue - this is why we believe it's biblical, but no infant baptism isn't a salvational issue; your father is still a Christian if he disagrees with us.

I agree with the previous posters, the issue is one of submission. After reading the materials we were provided with on infant baptism, she understood the issue much better. Learning to distinguishing between a biblical infant baptism in a Presbyterian church and the Catholic belief in baptismal regeneration was a biggie. She could now at least see both sides of the issue and agreed to accept my lead and baptize our children, and although it was a topic for discussion it obviously wasn't a make-it-or-break it issue with her father. I'm not sure if her out-of-town parents will make it to the baptism, though. :think: Our first child is due June 5th.

The other half of the discussion with my then fiance had to do with how we'd deal with adult children who wanted to be baptized again. I'd talk to them, give them the reasons why I disagreed with them, but ultimately as an adult, it would be their decision. We'd remind ourselves that it wasn't a salvational issue and that we'd rather they attend a sound baptist church than either no church at all or the PCUSA church down the road.

Now the tongues thing is a whole other :worms: Luckly my wife is sort of weirded out by tongues as well. :)
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
As long as they are under the headship of their Father, and according to the Father's paedo position, and the family's Paedo Church membership, it ought not be allowed.
My sister was baptized as an infant and raised in an Episcopalian church - as was I - but didn't come to faith until she was in college at Texas Tech, at which time she was baptized by the church she attended.

She says it was literally one of the happiest days of her life, and still is....right up there with her marriage and the births of her children.

I've never been baptized at Christ Chapel, but it's been more out of respect for my parents, who were pretty upset about my youngest sister being re-baptized.

Having been baptized back when I was four months old by unbelieving (my mother claims to be Christian, but trust me, she's not, while my father doesn't even make the claim any longer) parents in an apostate denomination isn't a baptism I take any pleasure in, to be honest. I'd love to be baptized at Christ Chapel.

Baptized by believing parents in a true church and actually raised in the faith and discipled (not just shuffled off to Sunday school and that's it as regards religious instruction) is one thing, but being baptized by unbelieving parents in an apostate denomination followed by no useful instruction so that one never heard the true gospel until one was in one's 40's isn't the same thing at all.

In any event, I don't think adult children who have presumably left their father's house and church should be expected to march to his drum beat.
For what it's worth I was brought up in a liberal United Methodist Church. We didn't attend when I was an infant, so I wasn't baptized until I was 12, at my confirmation. When I was 25 after I was converted I was immersed at a Wesleyan church, but after coming to paedo views I now view my immersion at 25 as, at best, an unnecessary act of supererogation and the first baptism as being valid after all, even though I wasn't a believer at that time. To open up another :worms: I would feel the same way had I been baptized at a Roman Catholic church instead of the UMC. (If someone wants to discuss the validity of Romish baptism, another thread should be opened.) Despite the fact that these churches are not sound and are guilty of many errors and heresies, it does not invalidate the baptism.
 

smhbbag

Puritan Board Senior
Any thoughts on the question of whether Reformed paedobaptists should court or marry Reformed credobaptists? (I view this as more of a question regarding courtship or marriage, rather than concerning baptism; that's why I put it in this forum.)
My wife was "baptized" as an infant in the CRC, and was raised faithfully and catechized well growing up. I was a reformed baptist when we met, and when we decided to pursue marriage, we knew that unity on this issue was vital. We simply placed a lot of trust in God that over the year or two we planned to be together before marriage, He would give us genuine, heart-felt agreement on the issue.

He did, and she became fully convinced of the credo position about 6 months before we married. At that time, we faced a difficult issue of her being under her father's authority, attending a paedo church, while wanting to be legitimately baptized. To leave her father's church (and hers), to be baptized seemed a bit imprudent and too much like a slap in the face. We've now been married, and she is attending a Baptist church and will be baptized in the next few weeks.

As others have mentioned, the agreement that the wife is to submit to the husband's authority in this matter is essential. If I end up being wrong, and her infant 'baptism' was in fact valid, then I will answer to God in full for her being re-baptized. Same goes for any of our children who are not baptized as infants - if I'm wrong, it's on my head entirely. Praise the Lord that sort of very difficult submission is not required of her, as God has brought us into full agreement.

Will I let my daughter marry a paedo when she grows up? I would be hard-pressed to deny my daughter the blessing of marriage to a faithful, honorable servant of Christ. I agree with others that I may only deny my blessing based on reasons that are explicitly listed in scripture as valid in that situation. But you bet we'd have a number of friendly talks on the matter :)

So, to answer the question of whether paedo's should court/marry credos...my answer is:

Paedo women should certainly marry credo's and convert/submit.
Paedo men should certainly marry credo's and convert.:smug:

In all seriousness, it is not something to be entered into lightly, and should only be done with mature individuals and wise counsel from others in the church family.
 
Last edited:

Kaalvenist

Puritan Board Sophomore
Wow... I'm a little surprised that it garnered this much response, in so short a time. Thanks for the input. :D
 

Zenas

Snow Miser
I would niether court nor marry a credo-baptist. She would have to submit to my authority or switch camps.

Thankfully, nothing like that ever has to happen, I'm already engaged to another baby sprinkler.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top