# Baptism as an element of worship



## elnwood (Oct 2, 2007)

Why is Baptism an element of worship in Reformed Churches?

This may seem a strange question, but according to the Regulative Principle of Worship, we should only do in worship what is commanded to be done in worship.

While there are imperatives to baptize in the New Testament, it is never commanded to be done in the worship service, either explicitly, implicitly, or by good and necessary inference, and every instance of baptism we see performed is done outside of the worship service.

Moreover, the Old Testament equivalent, circumcision, was not performed in synagogue or temple worship or by the priesthood specifically. It was performed on the eighth day, not on a day of Sabbath worship.

So shouldn't the Regulative Principle of Worship exclude baptism as an element of New Testament worship? Or is there freedom to take any imperative in the New Testament and incorporate it into the worship service?


----------



## JM (Oct 2, 2007)

Good question.

Gill on the subject here.


----------



## elnwood (Oct 3, 2007)

Thank you for the link, JM.

In brief:


> Among which, baptism must be reckoned one, and is proper to be treated of in the first place; for though it is not a church ordinance, it is an ordinance of God, and a part and branch of public worship. *When I say it is not a church ordinance, I mean it is not an ordinance administered in the church, but out of it*, and in order to admission into it, and communion with it; it is preparatory to it, and a qualification for it; it does not make a person a member of a church, or admit him into a visible church; persons must first be baptized, and then added to the church, as the three thousand converts were; a church has nothing to do with the baptism of any, but to be satisfied they are baptized before they are admitted into communion with it.


 (John Gill, Baptism, A Public Ordinance of Divine Worship)


----------



## elnwood (Oct 4, 2007)

I see that several people have voted in favor of baptism taking place in the worship service instead of outside. Would anyone like to justify that practice by applying the Regulative Principle of Worship?

I've been in Reformed Baptist churches that practice it both in the service and outside the service (mostly depending on whether there is a baptistery in the sanctuary). I am not sure which view I would consider more Reformed. The latter seems more consistent with New Testament practice and the Regulative Principle of Worship, but the former is more consistent with Reformed traditional practice.


----------



## KMK (Oct 4, 2007)

We practice baptism in the worship service. We do not have a bpatistry but we bring in a horse trough. I am interested to hear what people have to say on this subject. I like to do it during the service because I know that if we do it outside the service many some will not attend. I would like for as much of the congregation to be a part of it as possible. (So their own baptisms can be improved)


----------



## JM (Oct 4, 2007)

I see 10 so far that voted "Yes baptisms should be performed in the church" but haven't seen any reasons given why.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Oct 4, 2007)

How can you not consider Baptism as a part of the RPW. While I hold that Circumcision and Baptism are different in nature I do believe they are both signs and elements that permit entrance into the Covenant Communities. There are different promises associated between the two and the natures of the Covenants are different. So as in comparison I do believe that Baptism is associated with the RPW as is the LORD's table.


----------



## JM (Oct 4, 2007)

CredoCovenanter said:


> How can you not consider Baptism as a part of the RPW. While I hold that Circumcision and Baptism are different in nature I do believe they are both signs and elements that permit entrance into the Covenant Communities. There are different promises associated between the two and the natures of the Covenants are different. So as in comparison I do believe that Baptism is associated with the RPW as is the LORD's table.



Hey brother, I think the statement was kind of a question: _While there are imperatives to baptize in the New Testament, it is never commanded to be done in the worship service, either explicitly, implicitly, or by good and necessary inference, and every instance of baptism we see performed is done outside of the worship service._

Is there a few verses that command Baptism as an act of worship?

Peace.


----------



## elnwood (Oct 4, 2007)

CredoCovenanter said:


> How can you not consider Baptism as a part of the RPW. While I hold that Circumcision and Baptism are different in nature I do believe they are both signs and elements that permit entrance into the Covenant Communities. There are different promises associated between the two and the natures of the Covenants are different. So as in comparison I do believe that Baptism is associated with the RPW as is the LORD's table.



No doubt baptism, like the Lord's supper, is commanded, but unlike the Lord's supper, there's no precedence for it taking place in the regular gathering of believers. In the New Testament baptism occurs immediately after repentance and belief. There is no waiting until the next Lord's Day to be baptized in a worship service.

In contrast, we see the Lord's supper included in Paul's discussion of the gathering of believers in First Corinthians. We see the disciples breaking bread on the first day of the week. We have every indication that the Lord's supper is an element of worship.

So, according to the Regulative Principle of Worship, where do we see baptism commanded in the worship service? Would this not be "adding" to the worship service? Or perhaps there is freedom in whether baptism is to be in the worship service or apart from it?


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

As of late, I have been to busy to answer this question.... Maybe in a day I can expound some more... But for me personally the command lies in Matthew 28:29. Go into all the world, make disciples, baptize, and teach all I that I have taught you....

Unlike most Evangeljellys of today I first do not see this verse to mean that every tom, dick and hairy are to evangelize... Second, I see this for ministers.... Thirdly, how does one teach all that I have taught you and make disciples? Maybe by the preaching of the Word? By who? Perhaps the Preacher? Where does the word get preached at? Perhaps in Worship? Matthew 28 is for setting up churches and evangelizing by the ministry of the Word and Sacrament. When Missionaries go into a foreign nation what do they do... They start a church plant and start to worship God... So the command to baptize in worship rests in Matthew 28... Preaching the whole counsel of God is evangelism pure and simple to both the unbelievers and believers not through seeker services but by the pure word of God by pure Worship according to the Holy Writ by the whole counsel of God. We evangelize when we worship in Spirit and truth.. The preacher evangelizes through God's word making disciples, then comes baptizing followed by the teaching of the whole counsel of God... So baptism is a sacrament that is a worship element.... I also am thinking of the verse in 1 Cor. that tell us that the ministers are the keepers of the Holy mysteries to which are sacraments......

As much as I respect John Gill and love his writings I am going to have to not agree with him this time. I am surprised he took that stance.... But no man is perfect.... 



elnwood said:


> CredoCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> > How can you not consider Baptism as a part of the RPW. While I hold that Circumcision and Baptism are different in nature I do believe they are both signs and elements that permit entrance into the Covenant Communities. There are different promises associated between the two and the natures of the Covenants are different. So as in comparison I do believe that Baptism is associated with the RPW as is the LORD's table.
> ...


----------



## elnwood (Oct 4, 2007)

thunaer said:


> As of late, I have been to busy to answer this question.... Maybe in a day I can expound some more... But for me personally the command lies in Matthew 28:29. Go into all the world, make disciples, baptize, and teach all I that I have taught you....
> 
> Unlike most Evangeljellys of today I first do not see this verse to mean that every tom, dick and hairy are to evangelize... Second, I see this for ministers.... Thirdly, how does one teach all that I have taught you and make disciples? Maybe by the preaching of the Word? By who? Perhaps the Preacher? Where does the word get preached at? Perhaps in Worship? Matthew 28 is for setting up churches and evangelizing by the ministry of the Word and Sacrament. When Missionaries go into a foreign nation what do they do... They start a church plant and start to worship God... So the command to baptize in worship rests in Matthew 28... Preaching the whole counsel of God is evangelism pure and simple to both the unbelievers and believers not through seeker services but by the pure word of God by pure Worship according to the Holy Writ by the whole counsel of God. We evangelize when we worship in Spirit and truth.. The preacher evangelizes through God's word making disciples, then comes baptizing followed by the teaching of the whole counsel of God... So baptism is a sacrament that is a worship element.... I also am thinking of the verse in 1 Cor. that tell us that the ministers are the keepers of the Holy mysteries to which are sacraments......



Well, I take a little bit of offense because I do think that Matthew 28 applies to all Christians, and I do not consider myself an evangellifish. But that aside ...

Matthew 28 is clearly a missionary endeavor. You are saying that Matthew 28 dictates a context of a Sunday worship gathering. But this is not what we see in Acts. We see the apostles evangelizing, not within the context of a Sunday worship gathering, but going out to preach the gospel, no matter what day it was, to the nations, and baptizing them immediately when they come to faith. 

We see Paul preaching, not just in a worship setting, but on Mars Hill to the unbelievers, and in the synagogues on the Sabbath (which, in the NT, means Saturday, not Sunday). We see people baptized, not in a worship service, but after repentance, no matter what day it is, and brought into the church. And making disciples, of course, happens both inside and outside of the worship service.

If Matthew 28 was a command to do those things specifically in a worship context, it doesn't look like the disciples followed the command too closely. I don't have a problem, like John Gill did, of having baptism in the worship service. But I don't see anything in Matthew 28 or elsewhere specifying that baptism ought to be in a worship service. It seems to me that to take this view is to view all of the baptisms in the New Testament as improper, at best.


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

You know this thread brought back memories of mine regarding early church baptism when I was studing Christian architecture.......

I just pulled this from wikipedia. Very Interesting...



> In Christian architecture the baptistery or baptistry (Latin baptisterium) is the separate centrally-planned structure surrounding the baptismal font.
> 
> In the early Christian Church, the catechumens were instructed and the sacrament of baptism was administered in the baptistery.
> 
> ...


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

Pictures of Early Baptisteries

The Baptistry of Parma.






The Lateran baptistery





The baptistry of Florence


----------



## JM (Oct 4, 2007)

Wow, Roman Catholicism has some really nice Baptisteries, thanks for the pics.


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

Notice Wiki mentions that it was for full immersion and before infant baptism....... So you could call them Baptist Baptisteries.... 


One point for Baptist.... Hoo Raaa 




JM said:


> Wow, Roman Catholicism has some really nice Baptisteries, thanks for the pics.


----------



## MW (Oct 4, 2007)

elnwood said:


> So, according to the Regulative Principle of Worship, where do we see baptism commanded in the worship service?



A specific command is not necessary. What the apostles did in irregular circumstances is no rule for ordinary assemblies. It is important to take in all that Scripture says, and not merely fragmentary notices. Baptism is a distinguishing mark between Christians and non Christians, and is therefore a public ordinance. Two points in connection with John the Baptiser's ministry make evident that it should be administered in a public congregation by a minister of the Word.

1. John 1:31, "but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water." Baptism is an open testimony to the truth of Christianity, which is first of all committed to the church.

2. John came "preaching the baptism of repentance." Baptism derives all its significance as a sign from the Word of God, and therefore should be administered by one authorised to preach publicly.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Oct 4, 2007)

JM said:


> CredoCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> > How can you not consider Baptism as a part of the RPW. While I hold that Circumcision and Baptism are different in nature I do believe they are both signs and elements that permit entrance into the Covenant Communities. There are different promises associated between the two and the natures of the Covenants are different. So as in comparison I do believe that Baptism is associated with the RPW as is the LORD's table.
> ...



Well, You might have me there. As I recall I don't know of any baptisms recorded necessarily as being on Sunday or in tow with a Worship service so to speak. We are not necessarily told what day the household baptisms took place or if it was during a LORD's day service,or if it was always immediately. It is assumed by many that baptisms were immediately performed after confession and repentance. Cornelius' baptism was probably immediate but we still don't know if it was during a LORD's day service or not. The Ethiopian was immediate but he was not the normative as Cornelius' household wouldn't have been normative either. Sam Waldron speaks on the Ethiopian Enoch in the third link below. In the blog links below by Sam Waldron he mentions that one is baptised into the Church. I for one see the Church as a gathering of believers who are the body of Christ. Just putting those together suggests that baptism and worship belong together. Just my two cents.

Here are a few good blogs on Baptism into the Church. I also am not sure Acts is the only place we want to find out about the theology of baptism since there were many things that were not done in a normal way. 


- » Why Baptism Must Be into the Membership of a Local Church!

- » Why Baptism Must Be into the Membership of a Local Church!

- » Why Baptism Must Be into the Membership of a Local Church!


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Oct 4, 2007)

elnwood said:


> thunaer said:
> 
> 
> > But for me personally the command lies in Matthew 28:29. Go into all the world, make disciples, baptize, and teach all I that I have taught you....
> ...



Well, I am going to semi agree with Don here but not with much necessarily as you can tell by my previous post. 
Concerning the Evangeljellys comment as those who believe that Matthew 28:19 was for all Christians. I do believe it is a general command also. Do I believe everyone is suppose to baptise? No. But I do believe that everyone can disciple after a certain level of maturity and growth has been theirs in Christ. I do believe everyone can share God's truth and the faith of Christ. And not everyone becomes convinced and trusts Christ because of a Sermon preached on Sunday Morning or Evening. I became a Christian by reading the Bible on my own. Sure I needed the gifts of the church to mature me but I wasn't converted in or by a certain Church. I have also had the pleasure of leading others to the Saviour. I am not ordained. But I do believe I have to commission to go proclaim the word just as John Bunyan had or any Tom, Dick, or Harry whom God calls into his Kingdom. There are many passages where the individual is responsible to know God, His Word, and to proclaim truth, overcome evil, and win our brothers. I am not ordained to Baptise but I am a part of the body of Christ am I am responsible to lead others into the Church. Baptism is the initiation rite into the Church.


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

hmm, I was in a rush when I wrote that... let me clarify.... I was not calling all who believe that Matthew 28 evangeljellys.. But I was calling all evangeljellys of today Matthew 28 Evangelist..... There is a difference but I did not clarify enough....

Second Clarification..... Please brother do not take me wrong... I was not saying that Christian should not evangelize..... I believe there are plenty of passages for laymen to evangelize, i.e. Be Salt, Be Light, Give Reason for the Faith within you, Prayer, Money Support for Missionaries, Be a good testimony by conduit for those around you, etc... I was more precise saying that Matthew 28 is not for every tom, dick or hairy...... Matthew 28 is for ministers..... I do not believe laymen are called to baptize, or to teach... Those hold to the office of elder.... Those things hold true for worship and they hold true for the office of elder.... Not the laymen.....





CredoCovenanter said:


> elnwood said:
> 
> 
> > thunaer said:
> ...


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Oct 4, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Matthew 28 is for ministers..... I do not believe laymen are called to baptize, or to teach... Those hold to the office of elder.... Those things hold true for worship and they hold true for the office of elder.... Not the laymen.....



Let me reiterate. I do believe we are to teach, disciple, and admonish as laymen. We are not agreeing here. I do know of unordained men who have taught Sunday School. And it is practised in a lot of our churches under the leadership of the Elders. I have taught Sunday School in a Presbyterian Church. I have taught Sunday School in a Calvinistic Baptist Church. Teaching and Discipleship are things that take place not only on Sunday but on other days of the week also. I have discipled a few guys who are ministers now. Are you saying because I was not ordained the training and discipleship I gave them is outside of the boundaries Christ permits?

This is getting off track from the issue btw.


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

I am not saying it is right or wrong, but I am saying that someone who is unordained can not use Matthew 28 for what they are doing....... But this is offtopic..... So I cede at this point on this matter.......




CredoCovenanter said:


> thunaer said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew 28 is for ministers..... I do not believe laymen are called to baptize, or to teach... Those hold to the office of elder.... Those things hold true for worship and they hold true for the office of elder.... Not the laymen.....
> ...


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Oct 4, 2007)

Is Baptism a part of the Worship Service. I think it is by association to Church membership and union with Christ. I do have a question. Was circumcision a part of the RPW? I believe if it was on the 8th day of a new born's life he was to be circumcised into the Covenant. But someone else may know different.


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

I guess none of the paedo's want to touch this one with a ten foot pole... 







thunaer said:


> You know this thread brought back memories of mine regarding early church baptism when I was studing Christian architecture.......
> 
> I just pulled this from wikipedia. Very Interesting...
> 
> ...


----------



## Coram Deo (Oct 4, 2007)

It is very interesting that the early church kept baptism seperate outside of worship and in a seperate building called a baptistry....


----------



## elnwood (Oct 4, 2007)

thunaer said:


> hmm, I was in a rush when I wrote that... let me clarify.... I was not calling all who believe that Matthew 28 evangeljellys.. But I was calling all evangeljellys of today Matthew 28 Evangelist..... There is a difference but I did not clarify enough....



I thought it was implied, so thank you for the clarification.



thunaer said:


> Second Clarification..... Please brother do not take me wrong... I was not saying that Christian should not evangelize..... I believe there are plenty of passages for laymen to evangelize, i.e. Be Salt, Be Light, Give Reason for the Faith within you, Prayer, Money Support for Missionaries, Be a good testimony by conduit for those around you, etc... I was more precise saying that Matthew 28 is not for every tom, dick or hairy...... Matthew 28 is for ministers..... I do not believe laymen are called to baptize, or to teach... Those hold to the office of elder.... Those things hold true for worship and they hold true for the office of elder.... Not the laymen.....



You position on this was clear to me when I first read it. I do disagree, though. I think both non-ordained and ordained can teach and baptize. (In brief, I don't see any prohibition on laypersons baptizing, Paul as an Apostle did not consider baptizing a central duty as an Apostle, and the "mystery" = sacrament argument always seemed convoluted to me). But this is not an issue I would divide over.


----------



## KMK (Oct 5, 2007)

Couldn't we say that the Great Commisson was given to the church 'corporately' and therefore baptism should be a corporate form of worship. (Like preaching and teaching) Therefore it would be a form of corporate worship and be regulated as such.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Oct 5, 2007)

elnwood said:


> I think both non-ordained and ordained can teach and baptize. (In brief, I don't see any prohibition on laypersons baptizing, Paul as an Apostle did not consider baptizing a central duty as an Apostle, and the "mystery" = sacrament argument always seemed convoluted to me). But this is not an issue I would divide over.



Of course it would (and should) have a peripheral role in their ministry and duties _relative to_ the preaching of the Gospel - but that in itself doesn't imply anything regarding the proper administration of it in the role it _did_ (and does) possess.

And with respect to that administration, as Rev. Winzer noted, it concerns the systematic inter-relationship of entire issues such as the role of the Church and her officers as a whole (possessing the keys of the kingdom, as per Matthew 16), and the corporate nature of baptism as an ordinance _of the Church_ as a covenant community. Even in the Old Testament mention of the people being baptized in the Red Sea, it was administered by Moses as a prophet. In light of those things together, would New Testament believers have had any reason to think the pattern of baptism would have changed? Likewise, these broader issues would also seem to reveal the basis for baptism as part of corporate worship, since it is a _corporate_ sign by its very nature, and is always attached to the preaching of the Word, which we know to be an element of worship.

Also, regarding the issue of the "mysteries" being associated with the sacraments, there's more to it than just thinking that the former simply "refers to" the latter in a plain sense. Rather, the "mysteries" are contained in the Gospel (as per Romans 16:25, Ephesians 3:1-12, Ephesians 6:19), and what the sacraments _are_ in their very nature and purpose are signs and seals _of the Gospel_, pointing back to it, solely serving as visible testimonies of nothing other than the Gospel. And since the Church's officers are the "stewards of the mysteries of God" (as per 1 Corinthians 4, as Michael noted above), that in turn makes sense of just _why_ we see the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of its visible signs as lying with the apostles and pastors in the New Testament.


----------



## elnwood (Oct 5, 2007)

Me Died Blue said:


> elnwood said:
> 
> 
> > I think both non-ordained and ordained can teach and baptize. (In brief, I don't see any prohibition on laypersons baptizing, Paul as an Apostle did not consider baptizing a central duty as an Apostle, and the "mystery" = sacrament argument always seemed convoluted to me). But this is not an issue I would divide over.
> ...



Hi Chris, thank you for taking the time to address the question directly and intelligently. 

I don't think we can draw from the Red Sea example that NT believers would have assumed baptism was corporate. The Red Sea was a symbol of baptism, not an actual example of it. A better correlation can be made with the practice of circumcision and baptism, but circumcisions were not performed by priests or in the worship service or on the Sabbath but on the eighth day after birth.

John the Baptist's baptism was not a corporate gathering. We see baptisms occurring where there is much water, and any day of the week, not in a synagogue, or up on a mountain top, or where believers come and gather to worship.

Simply put, the New Testament practice does not line up with baptisms performed in the context of a worship gathering. The Regulative Principle of Worship depends on a clear distinction between what is contained in a worship service and what is outside a worship service, and baptism is not clearly in the category of an element of worship in the service.

Ministers of the word are set apart because of their authority and mandate to care for the flock. Obviously one of their roles, as a minister of the word, is the preaching of the gospel. They are ESPECIALLY charged with ministering in that capacity.

The problem I see is when the duties are being seen as being exclusive rather than being a special responsibility and duty of elders. The Bible is clear that all Christians are to teach and admonish one another whether they are an officer or not, male or female. The command to teach and preach is not exclusive to elders, but it is a more of a duty for them.

Matthew 28 also says to make disciples, and surely elders, as shepherds of the flock, are especially charged with discipling. But surely discipling is not a duty exclusive to officers of the church.

Similarly, with respect to the ordinances, the elders are more responsible for the administration for them, but there is nothing to indicate that the administration of them must be exclusive. Not only does Paul note that he is called to preach rather than to baptize, but he goes on to say that he baptized very few people personally. It is one thing to say that preaching is a greater duty than baptizing, but given that this worked out in practice that he baptized very few, I think that Paul is saying more than that.

If the ordinances are to be administered in the church, it makes sense to have the officers administer it. But I don't see any Scripture limiting the administration to the officers. First Corinthians, despite all the problems with the Lord's Supper, does not even mention an administrator of it, much less that it ought to be and elder. Nor does any Scripture directly mention either ordinance in the discussion of the qualifications and duties of elders.


----------



## JM (Oct 5, 2007)

I agree with Don.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Oct 5, 2007)

So should baptism be practiced like near the end of this video?

[video=youtube;zl7LmS87HWc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl7LmS87HWc[/video]



Not trying to start a fuss. Just wondering how you apply your view of baptism.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Oct 5, 2007)

I'm not entering a baptism debate, but thought the following historical references might be of interest for some. The Westminster Divines had this to say about the sacrament of baptism in public worship:

Westminster Confession of Faith, Chap. 21:



> 5. The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear;a the sound preaching;b and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God with understanding, faith, and reverence;c singing of psalms with grace in the heart;d *as, also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God:e* besides religious oaths,f vows,g solemn fastings,h and thanksgivings upon several occasions;i which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in an holy and religious manner.k
> 
> a. Acts 15:21; Rev 1:3. • b. 2 Tim 4:2. • c. Isa 66:2; Mat 13:19; Acts 10:33; Heb 4:2; James 1:22. • d. Eph 5:19; Col 3:16; James 5:13. • *e. Mat 28:19; Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 11:23-29*. • f. Deut 6:13 with Neh 10:29. • g. Isa 19:21 with Eccl 5:4-5. • h. Est 4:16; Joel 2:12; Mat 9:15; 1 Cor 7:5. • i. Est 9:22; Psa 107 throughout. • k. Heb 12:28.



Westminster Confession of Faith, Chap. 28:



> 2. The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the gospel lawfully called thereunto.a
> 
> a. Mat 3:11; 28:19-20; John 1:33.



Westminster Directory of Public Worship:



> Of the Administration of the Sacraments:
> 
> AND FIRST, OF BAPTISM.
> 
> ...



Commenting on the Directory of Public Worship, Rowland Ward says (Richard A. Muller & Rowland S. Ward, _Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and The Directory For Worship_, pp. 127-128:



> The common practice in Scotland was for baptism to be administered on the second Lord's Day after the birth, and with rare and controverted exceptions,[32] the baptism was always in the presence of the congregation. In England, the large majority of baptisms were private, and it was common for the midwife to present the child for baptism;[33] so there was a definite acceptance of the Scots' position at these points. Fonts in older pre-Reformation churches were at the doors; this was discountenanced as unsuited for baptism in the face of the congregation.
> 
> [32] For examples see McMillan, _Worship_, 254ff.
> [33] Leishman, _Westminster Directory_, 106, citing Robert Baillie.



Westminster Form of Presbyterian Church Government:



> Pastors.
> THe Pastor is an ordinary and perpetuall Officer in the Church, Jer. 3:15,16,17. Prophecying of the time of the Gospel, 1 Pet. 5:2,3,4; Ephes. 4:11,12,13.
> First, It belongs to his office;
> ...
> To administer the Sacraments, Matth. 28:19,20; Mark 16:15,16; 1 Corinth. 11:23,24,25, compared with 1 Cor:10.16.


----------



## JM (Oct 5, 2007)

LBC 39. That Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, given by Christ, to be dispensed only *upon persons professing faith*, or that are Disciples, or taught, who upon a profession of faith, ought to be baptized (Added later: "...and after to partake of the Lord's Supper.") Acts 2:37, 38; 8:36-38; 18:8 

41. *The persons designed by Christ, to dispense this ordinance, the Scriptures hold forth to a preaching Disciple, it being no where tied to a particular church, officer, or person extraordinarily sent, the commission enjoining the administration, being given to them under no other consideration, but as considered Disciples.* 
Isa. 8:16; Mat. 28:16-19; John 4:1-2; Acts 20:7; Mat. 26:26


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Oct 5, 2007)

This from the Didache:

7:1 But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize.
7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize {in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit} in living (running) water.
7:3 But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water;
7:4 and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm.
7:5 But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:6 But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able;
7:7 and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before.


----------



## elnwood (Oct 5, 2007)

JM said:


> LBC 39. That Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, given by Christ, to be dispensed only *upon persons professing faith*, or that are Disciples, or taught, who upon a profession of faith, ought to be baptized (Added later: "...and after to partake of the Lord's Supper.") Acts 2:37, 38; 8:36-38; 18:8
> 
> 41. *The persons designed by Christ, to dispense this ordinance, the Scriptures hold forth to a preaching Disciple, it being no where tied to a particular church, officer, or person extraordinarily sent, the commission enjoining the administration, being given to them under no other consideration, but as considered Disciples.*
> Isa. 8:16; Mat. 28:16-19; John 4:1-2; Acts 20:7; Mat. 26:26


----------



## JM (Oct 6, 2007)

I'm not NCT but like they way their confession reads on the subject:



> Article 26.
> 
> The Meaning of Baptism
> 
> ...


----------



## KMK (Oct 7, 2007)

I don't see how baptism could ever be considered a 'private' act of worship. (unless you baptize yourself which is not described in scripture) By definition baptism is an act of 'corporate' worship. So is preaching and teaching. (unless you are preaching to yourself, but that isn't really what the GC is all about) And since they are corporate by definition, I would not be so bold as to say with authority that the regulative principle does not apply.


----------



## JM (Oct 7, 2007)

KMK said:


> I don't see how baptism could ever be considered a 'private' act of worship. (unless you baptize yourself which is not described in scripture) By definition baptism is an act of 'corporate' worship. So is preaching and teaching. (unless you are preaching to yourself, but that isn't really what the GC is all about) And since they are corporate by definition, I would not be so bold as to say with authority that the regulative principle does not apply.



Brother I think you misunderstood the quote.


----------



## KMK (Oct 7, 2007)

JM said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see how baptism could ever be considered a 'private' act of worship. (unless you baptize yourself which is not described in scripture) By definition baptism is an act of 'corporate' worship. So is preaching and teaching. (unless you are preaching to yourself, but that isn't really what the GC is all about) And since they are corporate by definition, I would not be so bold as to say with authority that the regulative principle does not apply.
> ...



I was not responding to your quote in particular but the idea that the GC applies to 'individuals'. It is impossible to preach 'individually' unless you preach to yourself in your bedroom. Same with teaching. Same with baptism. These acts of worship, by definition, require a plurality of worshippers and therefore are rightly catagorized as 'corporate' acts of worship. 

This would be different than prayer, for example, which can be an act of 'private' or 'individual' worship. Perhaps the same could be said for Bible reading, memorization and meditation or even tithing.

All I am saying is that seeing that baptism is corporate...personally...I would stick to the RP and keep it as part of some kind of corporate worship service.


----------



## JM (Oct 7, 2007)

Wouldn't that be normative and not a RP?


----------

