Heidelberg1
Puritan Board Freshman
armorbearer said:Two points. (1.) If a sign represents something by divine ordinance, doesn't the lack of the sign mean something as a result of the same divine ordinance? Otherwise it is not really a sign but a mere teaching illustration.
The signs are meant to communicate to believers the reality of the grace that they have been given through faith. If there is no faith, how can God signify to the individual the reality of the grace they have received through the gospel?
Westminster Shorter Catechism
Q92. What is a sacrament?
A92. A sacrament is an holy ordinance instituted by Christ [a]; wherein, by sensible signs, Christ, and the benefits of the new covenant, are represented, sealed, and applied to believers .
[a]. Matt. 28:19; 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:19-20; ICor. 1:22-26
. Gal. 3:27; I Cor. 10:16-17
armorbearer said:(2.) The LBC states that those who profess faith are visible saints, "and of such ought all particular congregations to be constituted" (26:2). On this basis there should be no reason why a paedobaptist (only baptised as an infant) shouldn't be received into membership. Yet the brethren who reject our baptism also reject us for membership. Please explain why.
Is it strange to you that a disagreement over the proper use of the sacraments is a cause for breaking of fellowship? If a Presbyterian Church in your denomination started practicing paedocommunion, would the denomination try to stop it? If they failed, would they not remove the church from the denomination? They would break fellowship to the extent that they would no longer be in the same denomination. However, my guess is that they would not consider the members of the offending church non-Christians. For the sake of peace and unity within the church, they would not allow people of a different persuasion to become members of the church.