Need advice from Credo's who are in Paedo denominations

[Mocha]

Rich,

I enjoyed reading your testimonial. I can see you're in a similar situation. I wonder if the Credo's and the Paedo's should drop baptism (one's view of it) as a condition for church membership and freedom to serve?

If I'm not mistaken, the Free Presbyterian Church allows both credo's and paedo's to become members and serve a leadership role (elders & deacons). Maybe this should be the model for both Credo's and Paedo's. What do yo think?

Mike

[Edited on 1-28-2006 by Mocha]

 

[Puddleglum]

Originally posted by Mocha
You say you belong to the OPC. Do all OPC allow credo's to become members or do you only know about your own church. The OPC is one of the denominations our church is considering joining, so there may be hope.

Thanks again for your response!

Mike

The OP leaves that decision up to the individual sessions; so some churches do, some don't. It came up at the GA years ago . . . here's the report from that http://www.opc.org/GA/refuse_bapt.html - the majority report was not in favor of credo's being allowed membership, but Murray wrote a minority report (the second half of that document) which supports leaving up to the session - he's got some good points.

[Edited on 1-28-2006 by Puddleglum]

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Mike,

I think there are aspects of one's view of baptism that must be considered. It is quite clear that a person's view on Baptism is a reflection of their view of the Covenant of Grace. I think the consequences of that view have to be considered in what they would mean in how a person might influence others.

I think such matters should be left to the prudence of the local session as each man is different in what his view of baptism would represent. I do not agree with the idea of half-membership. A person is either part of the communion of Saints or he is not and should be entitled to the common privileges of being recognized as such. If we say we are brothers in Christ then we ought to be able to celebrate the Lord's Supper together and call each other brother in spite of a very significant difference over the nature of Baptism.

That being said, I don't have a problem with local leadership restricting who teaches. I am happy that the local leadership here allows me to teach but I, in no way, believe I am entitled to do so. That is a special privilege and it is not a statement that I am any less a Christian if local leadership does not permit me to teach. I further understand that they would be prudent not to elect me to eldership of a Church in which I disagree with their understanding and mode of Baptism. It doesn't offend me in the least.

With respect to my teaching in the Church the local leadership has essentially delegated authority to me but responsibility is not transferred over. That cannot be delegated. The harm I might cause would surely be a sin on my part (which I pray regularly the Lord will protect me from) but they will surely answer for it as well.

I guess this is all a round about way of saying that care and oversight of a congregation is something given to men ordained to make those decisions. If your local elders are comfortable letting you teach within the Church then it is not my place to criticize because it is not my authority being delegated. Likewise, I am in no place to demand a man delegate authority to men he feels uncomfortable doing so.

As one who has had command of hundreds of Marines and the inherent responsibility and burden that attend it, I don't really fret too much when men make the best judgments they can. While a minister of the Gospel has responsibility that is different in kind than my military authority was the authority stems from the same God. My experiences have given me a certain amount of calm about leadership decisions. I do my best to respectfully plead my opinion but, in the end, I rest in the fact that it is their place to make such decisions and not mine.

Thus, I would encourage you to make a Godly plea to the local leadership and explain your heart to them so they can make the most prudent decision. Perhaps they might not allow you to teach within the Church but have no problem with you continuing a ministry to the deaf outside the Church. You may also be able to convince them, based on the experiences and insights of other denominations and congregations, that you ought to be permitted all the common priviliges of Church membership.

[Edited on 1-28-2006 by SemperFideles]

 

[Larry Hughes]

Mike,

I understand your situation from the reverse angle. We were credo and came, over many years of prayer, study and consternation, to understand paedo to be scriptural (not debating that one way or the other here). But I do understand your struggle in principle though from the reverse angle if that makes sense?

Thus here in Ky it was hard to find a reformed church and we struggled for a while, nothing local that's for sure. SB, CoC, various assemblies of God and methodist churches about every block, no joke. Good reformed Presbyterian. and confessional Lutherans are not exactly growing on trees down here and definitely not local.

In that light, I agree with Pastorway, the drive is worth it, if it is within reason. We had to drive 35 miles one way to find a good solid reformed church, and it can be tough with two small babies. But worth it to hear the Gospel preached clearly and without mixture. I also agree with Phillip that no church, baptist or Presbyterian. or lutheran, ought be setting up "levels" of membership, I think that does indeed begin to create an issue.

Unfortunately, what does one do today in this mixture?

The number one piece of advice I would give ANYONE and that we followed ourselves was to look for the church in which the Pastor truly truly divides and proclaims the Law and Gospel in purity and without mixture and consistently labors the text to find Christ (and by Christ I mean Christ as Christ Redeemer not example) and DOES NOT turn you in to self or the subjective, nor makes you loose Christ on the sanctification view today which is exactly Rome's that has slipped back into protestantism today. AND THAT is as rare as hens teeth today even among so called conservative and/or reformed churches. You find a man serving the Word truly that way and his calling THAT way, stick with him because he is Christ's true undershephard and he is giving you the true Christ. All else have either NOT been called or are foresaking their calling and deadly to self and hearer. I don't care which denomination he comes from, even understanding that there is an issue concerning baptism.

The number one reason, not the only one, but primary reason we left our previous denomination was over the fact that they never gave the Gospel, they foresook giving Christ to us, but mingled everything, even the so called "calvinistic" pastors coming out of Southern (at least the ones we encountered) - and we attended several churches. It was not easy for us and emotionally devasting for us to have to leave to, but the voice of the Gospel demanded. If you find a shephard like that that is giving the Word in true Law and Gospel and the sacrament/ordinances as gifts to you be he baptist, Presbyterian. or lutheran I'd go there.

That's my advice for what its worth brother,

Larry

[Edited on 1-28-2006 by Larry Hughes]

 

[non dignus]

Would you want to spend the rest of your life in credobaptist churches? What would you deal with not to do so, especially if you did not dissent on confessional issues?

I think it would be harder for a baptist to attend a reformed church than vice versa. The 'sin' of commission is more visible than the 'sin' of omission.

I would seriously consider a Lutheran Church.


[Edited on 1-29-2006 by non dignus]

 

[john_Mark]

I don't have any good answers for you, but I am in a similar situation. Since my marriage my family and I have been attending a PCA church and we are credo. Yes, we are allowed to take the Lord's Supper and are going through intro to the church classes now. It's a wonderful church with very nice people and solid teaching.

I have no idea about what we will do concerning membership. I don't believe I could serve in any leadership capacity though I would like to. I was youth minister at my old SBC church, but the doctrine (or lack of) drove me away. I was attending a Dispensational-like, calvinist baptist church with whose endtimes position I didn't agree. So I wouldn't have been able to serve there either at least not ever as an elder.

I find the Dispensational hermeneutical issues tougher to overcome when teaching my family than the baptism issue. This thread has given me some things to ponder and I appreciate the comments.