Paedocommunion - Arguments
- Thread starter C. Matthew McMahon
- Start date
- Status
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
This post almost made me laugh because it is all too true. I know one Reformed denomination that had a congregation try to tie them up in knots to stop them from making a definitive ruling on paedocommunion. Sickening and truly divisive.
PA: 'We love the Church! We will obey her in all things! Long live Mother Kirk!'
Kirk: 'Stop practicing and advocating paedocommunion!'
PA: 'Hah hah! We don't have to do what you say!
Kirk: Goodbye!
[Edited on 8-16-2005 by poimen]
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
Fred (or anyone), do you know how many (ballpark) in the PCA hold to Paedocommunion? 5, 10 100?
[Edited on 8-16-2005 by webmaster]
I hope this is a good question, as I am somewhat ignorant on church discipline issues, and the question is relevant to a real example I am aware of....
How much room should we allow for those who hold to paedocommunion, are teachers of some kind in a local church, yet that local church does not allow it to be taught or preached? Do we disfellowship with them anyways? Do we disfellowship with that church? Can we even allow members to hold this in private, since this issue is considered to be a dividing line worth breaking fellowship over?
[Edited on 8-17-2005 by RAS]
How much room should we allow for those who hold to paedocommunion, are teachers of some kind in a local church, yet that local church does not allow it to be taught or preached? Do we disfellowship with them anyways? Do we disfellowship with that church? Can we even allow members to hold this in private, since this issue is considered to be a dividing line worth breaking fellowship over?
[Edited on 8-17-2005 by RAS]
WrittenFromUtopia
Puritan Board Graduate
All of my acquaintances that hold to PC are FV/AA people as well. Every single one. And, all of them deny that salvation has much, if anything, to do with "subjective conversion" or "individual conversion." Rather, everything, including regeneration, justification, and election, is made "corporate" and understood in a "covenantal" sense.
When asked if we should ask our children (who partake of the LS from birth ala PC) to profess faith, they vehemently say NO. We are to treat our children as elect, justified, regenerate children, and tell them to think that they are so as well.
When asked if we should ask our children (who partake of the LS from birth ala PC) to profess faith, they vehemently say NO. We are to treat our children as elect, justified, regenerate children, and tell them to think that they are so as well.
Alan, I think you will get a range of opinions here, but I think there is a difference between someone like G.I. Williamson who holds the view, but in submission to the Church does not teach it, advocate it or alter church practice to fit his views. In fact Williamson wrote a relatively scathing editorial in the OPC journal denouncing those who were publicly advocating paedocommunion. His point was that for elders to publicly promote a contra-confessional practice attacks the foundation of confessional system. So I would put men of that stripe in a whole different category then many we see today, whose main thrust is not making the case to their Church court, but instead seem to direct their main efforts to publicly undermining in books and on the web the confessional teachings on the matter.
Just my $0.02.
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
If anyone knows the percent of those adhering to PC today in the PCA, I'm just curious. Certianly the FV is growing rapidly in the PCA which is more dangerous that PC but usually sits with it.
As for breaking fellowship over it - that would depend, as some suggest, in my view, as to whether they adhere to FV, AA, NPP. If they are subverting the Gospel, that is one thing. Denying justification or changing justification is anathema.
I would not have broken fellowship with Augustine, even if he did believe in PC, or even baptismal regeneration.
As for breaking fellowship over it - that would depend, as some suggest, in my view, as to whether they adhere to FV, AA, NPP. If they are subverting the Gospel, that is one thing. Denying justification or changing justification is anathema.
I would not have broken fellowship with Augustine, even if he did believe in PC, or even baptismal regeneration.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
Gabe, I am sure that what you are saying is true, regarding your personal experience with PC people.
Nevertheless, I do just want to remind everyone that PC and FV/AA do not always go together. For example, R.C. Sproul Jr. (whom I respect very much), is PC, but is not FV/AA.
I don't agree with Sproul Jr.'s PC, but he is quite solid in other important ways. His book, "Almighty Over All", is an excellent read on God's Sovereignty, even offering a plausible argument for how sin entered the world in the first place.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
I believe Vern Poythress also is in favor of paedocommunion. He is of course a prolific author, and a professor at Westminster Seminary in Philly. I listened to him on the most recent edition of "St. Anne's Pub", and he seemed to make it pretty clear that he would practice paedocommunion if his denomination allowed it.
Here's the most recent edition of "St. Anne's Pub", if you want to listen online: http://www.stannespub.com/ . . . The title of this edition is "Leading Your Little Ones To Christ".
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I agree. One of my acquaintances--R.C. Sproul Jr--is not Federal Vision, yet he is PC.
Sproul Jr graciously agreed to an interview with me earlier this year.
Puritanhead
Puritan Board Professor
What about paedodedications?
WrittenFromUtopia
Puritan Board Graduate
Das ist nicht so gut..
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
While I already know German, if you pronounce that out loud without thinking of it, you can figure out what it means!
Puritanhead
Puritan Board Professor
- Status
