# re the status of "Covenant children"



## JennyG (Aug 18, 2012)

I think I understand what it is to be a "covenant child", but can children be covenant children with only one believing parent? If the other parent is present and involved, but not a believer. What about one late-converted and one unbelieving, (meaning that they were baptised in pure formality?)
The question was suggested by Andres' thread about addressing covenant children in the "family matters" forum.


----------



## Scott1 (Aug 18, 2012)

The Apostle Paul assures people in this situation that indeed one believing parent makes the child "holy" that is, set aside to a position of privilege by virtue of having that one believing parent who can raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and the benefit of a covenant community of believers. That means the child can be baptized and be considered a member of the church. (There is a distinction made between "visible" and "invisible" church, the former being made up of adult believers and their children).



> I Corinthians 7
> 
> 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.



Baptism would be "valid" and is to be done only one time, even if, in retrospect, it seems that the believing parent who presented the child was not really a believer then (but is now).

If I'm understanding your question, rest assured.


----------



## JennyG (Aug 18, 2012)

thank you, Scott


----------



## Andres (Aug 18, 2012)

To add to what Scott has said, this is the position of the WCF as well. 



> WCF 28.4
> Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.


----------



## JennyG (Aug 18, 2012)

that's encouraging. But I wish now I had made more sure to go on considering and addressing them all as believers, until and unless they actively rebelled. As it was, I rather went out of my way to "honour" and acknowledge the questioning independence of two of them as they grew up. It seemed the right way at the time.


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 18, 2012)

Jenny, I think it helps to see God's covenant being made with us as Jonathan and David made a covenant -- to show kindness even to one another's seed for the sake of the love the bore to one another. For as long as He is the God of an individual (which is forever), He remembers His kindness to their seed. So I think this is not limited to infants, or to having been a believer when one's children were infants, or to having a believing spouse. It is part of the overflowing, everlasting love of God to the individual. It is part of His being their 'kinsman redeemer' and taking upon Himself all their concerns. It is a manifestation that His 'love knows no limits' and has to find expression in love to others for the sake of the loved one. I loved this section in the Institutes:



> To this we may add, that he not only declared he was, but also promised that he would be, their God. By this their hope was extended beyond present good, and stretched forward into eternity. Moreover, that this observance of the future had the effect, appears from the many passages in which the faithful console themselves not only in their present evils, but also for the future, by calling to mind that God was never to desert them. Moreover, in regard to the second part of the promise—viz. the blessing of God, its extending beyond the limits of the present life was still more clearly confirmed by the words, I will be the God of your seed after you (Gen. 17:7). If he was to manifest his favour to the dead by doing good to their posterity, much less would he deny his favour to themselves. God is not like men, who transfer their love to the children of their friends, because the opportunity of bestowing kind offices as they wished upon themselves is interrupted by death. But God, whose kindness is not impeded by death, does not deprive the dead of the benefit of his mercy, which, on their account, he continues to a thousand generations. God, therefore, was pleased to give a striking proof of the abundance and greatness of his goodness which they were to enjoy after death, when he described it as overflowing to all their posterity (Exod. 20:6). The truth of this promise was sealed, and in a manner completed, when, long after the death of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, he called himself their God (Exod. 20:6).



(Book 2, Chapter 10)

I think it fits the astonishing pattern of God's dealings, when we consider that He loves us for Christ's sake. 



> Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise;
> Be thankful unto him, and bless his name,
> For the LORD is good:
> His mercy is everlasting,
> And his truth endures to all generations.


----------



## Miss Marple (Aug 18, 2012)

It is an interesting thing, when we think of other religions.

In the Silicon Valley, growing up, we had one (!) Jewish boy at our school. Known to be Jewish, and this in elementary school before any Bar Mitzvah, he was known as the Jewish kid. Imagine people saying, well, perhaps you will choose to be a Jew when you grow up! It is rather insulting when you stop to think of it.

During my childrens' swimming lessons, one little boy took his lessons with his headdress on. He was known as the Sikh child. No one questioned whether he might be any other faith. He was a sikh. Would anyone say to him, "Do you think you might become a Sikh when you are an adult?" No, of course not. He is a Sikh now.

I see little girls led by the hand through Costco these days, by women in burkas. These are Muslim children. I know, they could become something else at some point. But everyone acknowledges them as Muslim children. Not blank slates. They are expected to have Muslim beliefs and participate in Muslim practices. Not to sit there, thinking it over.

The boy across the street from us was from a Buddhist family; one so serious that he went to Buddhist boarding school during the school year. He was acknowledged as a Buddhist. You didn't see him in a Hare Krishna robe one day, celebrating Diwali the next. He was a Buddhist. I treated him as such.

And so my children are Christian children. While change as adults may be possible, it is not likely. Everyone who knows us, I believe, well knows that my children are Christian children. We are a Christian family. No dispute about it with me. No one had better ask, so, do you think you might be a Christian someday? of my kids! It would be very insulting to us, as a Christian family, for anyone to assume our children are not Christians. Were it done in ignorance by non-Christians, I'd take the opportunity, to witness, but from a fellow believer? Very upsetting.

I attended a PCA church in Virginia for two + years while my husband was going to law school. Like most churches in the South, it was big (300 or so) and we had several infant baptisms a year. EVERY TIME, the pastor would hold the baby up before the church and say, "Now, this baby is not a Christian. But we hope someday he will be, and we will therefore baptize him in hope. . .!" I found that to be horrible, and needless to say, we waited to return to SF to baptize our latest addition - rather than have him held up and declared an unbeliever before the congregation.


----------



## JennyG (Aug 19, 2012)

a mere housewife said:


> Jenny, I think it helps to see God's covenant being made with us as Jonathan and David made a covenant -- to show kindness even to one another's seed for the sake of the love the bore to one another. For as long as He is the God of an individual (which is forever), He remembers His kindness to their seed. So I think this is not limited to infants, or to having been a believer when one's children were infants, or to having a believing spouse. It is part of the overflowing, everlasting love of God to the individual. It is part of His being their 'kinsman redeemer' and taking upon Himself all their concerns. It is a manifestation that His 'love knows no limits' and has to find expression in love to others for the sake of the loved one.


that's a beautiful thought, which I will rest on! Thank you, Heidi


----------



## JennyG (Aug 19, 2012)

How deep the Old Testament is with meanings that don't leap out at first. I'm thinking about David's faithful dealing towards Mephibosheth through everything, only for Jonathan's sake.


----------



## JennyG (Aug 19, 2012)

...or perhaps, for his own name's sake


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 19, 2012)

JennyG said:


> that's a beautiful thought, which I will rest on!



I think we can most deeply rest in His love, as He does -- 'His love, not mine, the resting place: His truth, not mine, the tie.' 

& I agree that the Old Testament is beautiful with shadows blowing over every page that we are always learning to see with more meaningful delineation, as our eyes adjust to the light. Much love to you dear Jenny on this Lord's Day. Praying for you and yours.


----------

