# Question concerning Baptism



## Anton Bruckner (Jan 26, 2007)

Here goes.

1. I was Baptized in an Arminian Church, should I get rebaptized since I am now reformed?

2. Do parents have the right to baptize their children or is this only constrained to the Pastor or Elder.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jan 26, 2007)

Slippery said:


> Here goes.
> 
> 1. I was Baptized in an Arminian Church, should I get rebaptized since I am now reformed?
> 
> 2. Do parents have the right to baptize their children or is this only constrained to the Pastor or Elder.



1. Most likely not. If you were baptized by a duly ordained minister then the signficance of your baptism is not tied to either your sincerity at the time nor his complete understanding. If that was the case, Presbyterians would invalidate almost all Baptist baptisms because they have a faulty view of the significance of the sacrament.

2. No your parents do not have the rights of a minister.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 26, 2007)

Slippery said:


> Here goes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jan 26, 2007)

thanks a lot guys.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Jan 26, 2007)

To point number two about parents:

If a parent took it upon himself to baptize his child would that baptism be considered valid?

I say this because a friend of mine from my old seeker church days was a professing “Presbyterian” as he said. That is, he was baptized and raised in the Presbyterian church and promotes the WCF but somehow ended up being a member along with his family at a willow creek model seeker church.

He raised that he had great concerns over the matter that I, while leading a small group at our seeker church, used to administer communion to my group every Friday night.

But then, later he expressed how, since his family was attending a Baptist church (the same seeker church my family attended with his) he held a private baptism in his home for his children inviting family and such while he administered the water over his child.

Now I repented of my pre-reformed days of acting as a self-appointed teacher of the word, but he, last I knew didn’t think anything wrong with how he administered the sacrament of baptism to his children. He now attends a start up EPC, so I wonder if his pastor will take issue. But then again it is an EPC so who knows?

So if that is the case would any confessional Presbyterian church consider his children baptized?


----------



## CDM (Jan 26, 2007)

The local Mega church by me has the Father (don't know about the Mothers) in the pool with the Pastor. The Father is dunking their offspring while the Pastor recites the words.

How's that for a little mix and match?


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Jan 26, 2007)

mangum said:


> The local Mega church by me has the Father (don't know about the Mothers) in the pool with the Pastor. The Father is dunking their offspring while the Pastor recites the words.
> 
> How's that for a little mix and match?



Yeah, I believe it. The question I have is why would a Baptist church even insist on only ministers administering the sacraments? What would be their basis for such a stance? This is done in reformed churches because of the regulative principal, no? The continuity of the administration is carried over and not rescinded or changed, so we still maintain that the elders are the only men approved to do such.


----------



## BJClark (Jan 26, 2007)

ChristopherPaul;



> Yeah, I believe it. The question I have is why would a Baptist church even insist on only ministers administering the sacraments? What would be their basis for such a stance? This is done in reformed churches because of the regulative principal, no? The continuity of the administration is carried over and not rescinded or changed, so we still maintain that the elders are the only men approved to do such.



When my oldest trusted in Christ as her Savior, the pastor of the church we attended refused to baptise her, he thought she was too young to be baptised even though she knew why she needed to be...

when she got home she asked if I could baptise her in the bath tub, because she wanted to be obiedent to Christ and be baptised...so I baptised her...however, when we joined another church, she went to the pastor and asked to be baptised again. She was 8 by this time, and she explained the circumstances to him that she trusted in Christ as her Savior a couple years earlier and the pastor refused to baptise her because he thought she was too young, so I baptised her in the tub, He told her.."well, you don't NEED to be re-baptised again, but in that you desire to have a witnesses and make it a public profession, I'll do it." 

So I have to ask the same question as others...what says a person has to be a Pastor/Elder to administer the baptism? Why couldn't it be another believer? Baptism is not a saving ordinence, but a show of profession of faith...an act of obedience in following Christ...So why couldn't parents who are believers baptise their children?


----------



## JonathanHunt (Jan 26, 2007)

SemperFideles said:


> because they (Baptists) have a faulty view of the significance of the sacrament.



Huh. Do not SO!


----------



## JonathanHunt (Jan 26, 2007)

ChristopherPaul said:


> Yeah, I believe it. The question I have is why would a Baptist church even insist on only ministers administering the sacraments? What would be their basis for such a stance? This is done in reformed churches because of the regulative principal, no? The continuity of the administration is carried over and not rescinded or changed, so we still maintain that the elders are the only men approved to do such.



There is no consistent practice on this even in 'reformed' (I prefer 'Particular') Baptist Churches.

Dr Joel Beeke was preaching at my former church not long ago and was rather concerned that an elder (in his eyes a RE, not a TE), presided. That said, the church has ALWAYS had a current elder (or at the outside, a retired minister) presiding at the Lord's table and ALWAYS a minister baptising (sometimes with physical assistance from another layman for physical strength reasons).

I tend towards the position that only elders should preside at the Table and Baptise, BUT as a Baptist I am quite honest in saying that I can't insist upon it from scripture, because otherwise I think we'd be in the realm of double standards. Also, I am quite happy if there is no elder present, to preside at the table (this has happened before when I have preached out at small churches which only have one elder (their pastor) due to size.)

JH


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 26, 2007)

Extraordinary circumstances and situations alone would allow for a baptism by other than an elder. If a church and elder are available, the independant baptism would be a no no as Christ did not put His church together to function in such a manner.


----------



## Gryphonette (Jan 26, 2007)

It's not at all unusual for a deacon or elder at Christ Chapel to baptize his own child...happened just last Sunday, in fact. 

I've read through the thread but am unclear as to why it _must_ be a minister - by which I'm assuming you mean a ruling elder? - who performs a baptism.

From my ex-Episcopalian and RC background I can understand why those bodies would believe only priests (barring imminent death, when anyone can baptize) can baptize, but am blanking on why this would be so in a Presbyterian or similar denomination. What is the Scriptural support for it?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 26, 2007)

Gryphonette said:


> It's not at all unusual for a deacon or elder at Christ Chapel to baptize his own child...happened just last Sunday, in fact.



Ann,
I assume you would agree that with the office of Elder comes certain responsibilities. Would you agree that these responsibilities separate the elders from the flock for specific duties? 




> I've read through the thread but am unclear as to why it _must_ be a minister - by which I'm assuming you mean a ruling elder? - who performs a baptism.



The WCF ch 28 states:


> IV. There be only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, baptism, and the Supper of the Lord: neither of which may be dispensed by any, but by a minister of the Word lawfully ordained.[10]
> 
> 10. Matt. 28:19; I Cor. 4:1; 11:20, 23; Eph. 4:11-12



The LBC ch 28 states:


> II. These holy appointments are to be administered by those only who are qualified and thereunto called, according to the commission of Christ.[2]
> 
> 2. Matt. 28:19; I Cor. 4:1



The Larger Catechism states:


> Q158: By whom is the word of God to be preached?
> A158: The word of God is to be preached only by such as are sufficiently gifted,[1] and also duly approved and called to that office.[2]
> 
> 1. I Tim. 3:2, 6; Eph. 4:8-11; Hosea 4:6; Mal. 2:7; II Cor. 3:6
> ...


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jan 26, 2007)

Scott Bushey said:


> I've read through the thread but am unclear as to why it _must_ be a minister - by which I'm assuming you mean a ruling elder? - who performs a baptism.
> 
> From my ex-Episcopalian and RC background I can understand why those bodies would believe only priests (barring imminent death, when anyone can baptize) can baptize, but am blanking on why this would be so in a Presbyterian or similar denomination. What is the Scriptural support for it?


[/QUOTE]

I used the term "minister" though I believe it could be any person authorized by the Church to act in that fashion.

I believe the sacrament must be done in order. The Church is the institution that baptizes and her offficers have the authority to determine who they will grant the ministerial authority to administer the sacrament. That minister then has the authority to act as God's herald to ministerially declare the promise of God in the baptism of an individual.

I'm sure there are more sophisticated explanations but that's how I understand it.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 26, 2007)

The Belgic Confession states:



> We believe that we ought diligently and circumspectly to discern from the Word of God which is the true Church, since all sects which are in the world assume to themselves the name of the Church. But we speak not here of hypocrites, who are mixed in the Church with the good, yet are not of the Church, though externally in it; but we say that the body and communion of the true Church must be distinguished from all sects that call themselves the Church.
> The marks by which the true Church is known are these: If the pure doctrine of the gospel is preached therein; if it maintains the pure administration of the sacraments as instituted by Christ; if church discipline is exercised in chastening [1] of sin; in short, if all things are managed according to the pure Word of God, all things contrary thereto rejected, and Jesus Christ acknowledged as the only Head of the Church. Hereby the true Church may certainly be known, from which no man has a right to separate himself.
> 
> With respect to those who are members of the Church, they may be known by the marks of Christians; namely, by faith, and when, having received Jesus Christ the only Savior, they avoid sin, follow after righteousness, love the true God and their neighbor, neither turn aside to the right or left, and crucify the flesh with the works thereof. But this is not to be understood as if there did not remain in them great infirmities; but they fight against them through the Spirit all the days of their life, continually taking their refuge in the blood, death, passion, and obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom they have remission of sins, through faith in Him.
> ...





> We believe that this true Church must be governed by that spiritual polity which our Lord has taught us in His Word; namely, that there must be ministers or pastors to preach the Word of God and to administer the sacraments; also elders and deacons, who, together with the pastors, form the council of the Church; that by these means the true religion may be preserved, and the true doctrine everywhere propagated, likewise transgressors chastened [1] and restrained by spiritual means; also that the poor and distressed may be relieved and comforted, according to their necessities. By these means everything will be carried on in the Church with good order and decency, when faithful men are chosen, according to the rule prescribed by St. Paul in his Epistle to Timothy.





> We believe that the ministers of God's Word, the elders, and the deacons ought to be chosen to their respective offices by a lawful election by the Church, with calling upon the name of the Lord, and in that order which the Word of God teaches. Therefore every one must take heed not to intrude himself by improper means, but is bound to wait till it shall please God to call him; that he may have testimony of his calling, and be certain and assured that it is of the Lord.
> As for the ministers of God's Word, they have equally the same power and authority wheresoever they are, as they are all ministers of Christ, the only universal Bishop and the only Head of the Church.
> Moreover, in order that this holy ordinance of God may not be violated or slighted, we say that every one ought to esteem the ministers of God's Word and the elders of the Church very highly for their work's sake, and be at peace with them without murmuring, strife, or contention, as much as possible.





> In the meantime we believe, though it is useful and beneficial that those who are rulers of the Church institute and establish certain ordinances among themselves for maintaining the body of the Church, yet that they ought studiously to take care that they do not depart from those things which Christ, our only Master, has instituted. And therefore we reject all human inventions, and all laws which man would introduce into the worship of God, thereby to bind and compel the conscience in any manner whatever. Therefore we admit only of that which tends to nourish and preserve concord and unity, and to keep all men in obedience to God. For this purpose, excommunication or church discipline is requisite, with all that pertains to it, according to the Word of God.


----------



## Gryphonette (Jan 26, 2007)

Ah. Thank you very much. ;^)


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 26, 2007)

The Heidelberg Catechism states:



> Q83: What is the Office of the Keys?
> A83: The preaching of the Holy Gospel and Christian discipline; by these two the kingdom of heaven is opened to believers and shut against unbelievers.[1]
> 
> 1. Matt. 16:18-19; 18:18; John 20:23; Luke 24:46-47; I Cor. 1:23-24
> ...


----------

