Morning Credo-PBers, I was reading an article posted today on Building Jerusalem by Stephen Kneale, which poses questions to open-membership credos on church membership using four different scenarios of individuals baptized as infants. I thought it might make for an interesting discussion here. The comments are 'off' on the site, so I couldn't pingback showing the discussions here. I'll contact Mr. Kneale separately to let him know I cited the article here. The author's questions are: Which, if any of these people, do you permit to join your church (presuming none of them are willing to be credobaptised)? If you do allow any of them to join – given your baptistic stance and membership criteria – on what grounds do you welcome them into membership? If you permit some of them into membership but not others, on what basis are you differentiating between them? Scenario A A Catholic, baptised as a child into the Roman Catholic Church, later becomes convicted of the gospel and converts. You have no qualms about affirming them as a genuine believer. They look to join your church in membership, which requires members to be baptised and practices credobaptism. The individual believes, whilst they have become convinced of the gospel and left the Catholic Church since, that their infant baptism is still valid, albeit they now view it differently to what they were initially taught it meant. Scenario B A Methodist was baptised as a child in a Methodist church. Their parents are not genuine believers and weren’t at the point they baptised their child. You are convinced, however, that the church which baptised him holds to the gospel. The person in question has since been through some Bible studies with your church and has clearly become a believer. They now want to join your church but believe that their previous baptism was valid. Scenario C An Anglican, who was not a child of believing parents and was baptised in a church that you are not convinced holds to the gospel. Through contact with another Bible-believing church, this individual became a believer and joined that church in which baptism is not a criteria for membership. You are convinced this person is a believer, and the church at which they were a member is a solid, Bible-believing church. They have now moved to your area and wish to join your church. Again, they insist their paedobaptism is valid. Scenario D An Anglican, who is the child of believing parents, and was baptised in a solid, Bible-believing church. You have no doubts about the gospel preached in that church, you are convinced the parents are genuine believers and you are sure the individual is a believer too. They have served in that Anglican church and left in good standing. Having moved out of the area, they find themselves looking to join your church as it belongs to the same gospel partnership as their previous Anglican Church. They are adamant that their paedobaptism is valid. Thoughts? The article on Building Jerusalem can be read in its entirety here. At the end are additional musings by the author on considerations wrestled with.