# How do paedobaptist churches deal with the influence of unregenerate members?



## Jie-Huli (Oct 15, 2005)

My understanding of the paedobaptist viewpoint is that the church is an organic entity, made up of both good branches that will bear fruit and bad branches that will be cut off. Thus, it seems that, from the paedobaptist perspective, although the language of covenant promises will be used for the whole church, everyone knows in fact that some members of the church do not belong to those promises at all, since not all Israel is Israel. There may well be many unregenerate, yea even reprobate, members of the church.

I have two main questions concerning this:

1) How do paedobaptist churches deal with the fact that a considerable portion of the members may be unregenerate? How do they avoid letting the unregenerate members influence the life and government of the church?

2) On what basis are unregenerate "covenant children" (baptised in the church as infants) eventually "cut off" of the vine? By the same criteria as other members (such as gross sin or refusal to accept sound doctrine)? But when it is not taken for granted that they are converted members of the elect when they are accepted into the church in the first place, is there in practice more allowance for their unbelief in earlier years, while waiting to see whether they do experience conversion?

I think the answers to these questions may be a great help to me in understanding the paedobaptist position as a whole.

Many thanks to anyone who can offer any light here.

[Edited on 10-15-2005 by Jie-Huli]


----------



## Scott Bushey (Oct 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jie-Huli_
> I have two main questions concerning this:
> 
> 1) How do paedobaptist churches deal with the fact that a considerable portion of the members may be unregenerate? How do they avoid letting the unregenerate members influence the life and government of the church?



People are not segregated as only God knows whom the good or bad branches are. All members are influenced by Godly preaching and example.



> 2) On what basis are unregenerate "covenant children" (baptised in the church as infants) eventually "cut off" of the vine?



Jesus will do this at the end of the age.



> By the same criteria as other members (such as gross sin or refusal to accept sound doctrine)?



Yes, unrepentance will result in discipline, which in turn will result in excommunication.



> But when it is not taken for granted that they are converted members of the elect when they are accepted into the church in the first place, is there in practice more allowance for their unbelief in earlier years, while waiting to see whether they do experience conversion?



Disciples grow at different levels. Conversion is not validated by outward confessions; many of these will show to be fruitless on that terrible day as well. Conversions are validated by fruit beared and perseverance and improving one's baptism.

[Edited on 10-15-2005 by Scott Bushey]


----------



## fredtgreco (Oct 15, 2005)

Jie-Huli,

Since one cannot be a coommunion member with full privileges (voting for officers, etc) until one makes a crediblen profession of faith before the Session, I would state that you question could be directed in exactly the same fashion at a Baptist church.

There is no difference in the communing membership of paedobaptist and baptist churches.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Oct 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jie-Huli_
> 1) How do paedobaptist churches deal with the fact that a considerable portion of the members may be unregenerate? How do they avoid letting the unregenerate members influence the life and government of the church?



How does a credobaptist church handle this fact? Seriously. Just because we acknowledge that people can deceive both themselves and others (so ultimately, we are not the infallible determiners of one´s salvation) DOES NOT mean that we just throw up our hands and say "œsince we can´t know definitively, we won´t be concerned at all." On the contrary, paedobaptist churches take AT LEAST as much care in bringing someone into communing membership as credobaptist churches do in bringing someone into membership. Practically speaking, the only way someone is a communing member "“ and therefore having a voice in the affairs of the local church "“ is if they meet a number of criteria, chief among these is that they must have professed faith in Christ. Furthermore, it is not like we simply say, "œOh, Johnny says he believes in Jesus, so let´s let him have a vote." No, the elders of the church examine him to see if the profession of faith is credible. Based upon that, we operate on the assumption that the one professing faith is regenerate until their fruit proves otherwise. 
One of the caricatures of Reformed ecclesiology that is rampant at Southern is that we just don´t really care about regenerate church membership. We do.



> 2) On what basis are unregenerate "covenant children" (baptised in the church as infants) eventually "cut off" of the vine? By the same criteria as other members (such as gross sin or refusal to accept sound doctrine)? But when it is not taken for granted that they are converted members of the elect when they are accepted into the church in the first place, is there in practice more allowance for their unbelief in earlier years, while waiting to see whether they do experience conversion?



I don´t get this objection. Who said that it is normative for paedobaptists to "œtake it for granted" that our children are "œconverted members of the elect" when they are accepted into the church? I do presume they are among the elect "“ but that doesn´t mean that I take it for granted that their election has been manifest in their lives yet. So I faithfully teach my children their covenant obligations to have faith in Christ, to love God with all their being, and their neighbor as themselves, etc"¦ and I wait and watch for them to profess faith in the Lord who called them to himself. 



[Edited on 10-15-2005 by SolaScriptura]


----------



## SolaScriptura (Oct 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> Jie-Huli,
> 
> Since one cannot be a coommunion member with full privileges (voting for officers, etc) until one makes a crediblen profession of faith before the Session, I would state that you question could be directed in exactly the same fashion at a Baptist church.
> ...



Aw, man! You beat me to it!


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Oct 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jie-Huli_
> My understanding of the paedobaptist viewpoint is that the church is an organic entity, made up of both good branches that will bear fruit and bad branches that will be cut off. Thus, it seems that, from the paedobaptist perspective, although the language of covenant promises will be used for the whole church, everyone knows in fact that some members of the church do not belong to those promises at all, since not all Israel is Israel. There may well be many unregenerate, yea even reprobate, members of the church.



Hello Jie,

We would say that the visible, i.e., the institutional church has within its membership both believers and unbelievers. There is within the visible church an "invisible" church, i.e., believers who are united to Christ by grace alone, through faith alone. This "invisible" church is composed of members of the church visible, members of the church militant and church triumphant (glorified believers).



> 1) How do paedobaptist churches deal with the fact that a considerable portion of the members may be unregenerate? How do they avoid letting the unregenerate members influence the life and government of the church?



Any attempt to quantify the proportions would be sheer speculation. As others have noted, we require a "credible profession of faith" from our baptized members after a suitable period of catechetical instruction. 

We regard baptism as containing promises to all baptized persons, namely that whoever believes will be justified and saved. Baptism also certifies to a baptized person who believes that what their baptism promised is actually true of them.

See: http://public.csusm.edu/guests/rsclark/Infant_Baptism.html

"Influence" is a nebulous concept. Reformed and Presbyterian churches are no strictly democratic, thus the influence of laity is diffused. No one is admitted to special office (deacon, elder, or minister) without examination and ordination. Presumably, a well-organized congregation (that has the three marks of a true church; Belgic Conf Art 29) is led by elders and a minister and not by unordained laity. 

See: http://public.csusm.edu/guests/rsclark/Ecclesiology.htm

If a mature member, having made profession of faith is found to be leading other members astray morally or doctrinally, he should be admonished etc according to Matt 18.



> 2) On what basis are unregenerate "covenant children" (baptised in the church as infants) eventually "cut off" of the vine? By the same criteria as other members (such as gross sin or refusal to accept sound doctrine)? But when it is not taken for granted that they are converted members of the elect when they are accepted into the church in the first place, is there in practice more allowance for their unbelief in earlier years, while waiting to see whether they do experience conversion?



A "credible profession" entails not only a sound account of essential biblical doctrine as summarized in our catechisms and confessions, but also some examination of the catechumen's life. 

There are not ordinarily mature baptized members who have not made profession of faith. If after catechesis a young person does not make profession of faith he risks coming under discipline and, if he is impenitent, excommunication.

As to when a young person is expected to make profession of faith, there is no hard and fast rule. In practice, it depends upon when instruction/catechesis is begun. In my opinion, children are able to begin memorization at a very early age and basic catechesis could be complete not long after age 12-13. If instruction is begun later, then profession would occur later. The most important issue is not age, but, having competed catechesis, whether the young person is ready to take up publicly the promises and obligations of the covenant of grace. 

See: 

http://public.csusm.edu/guests/rsclark/memcat.htm

There is a difference of opinion among Reformed and Presbyterian churches as to whether we should presume regeneration. Whether one presumes that covenant children are regenerate is beside the point. The basis for the rite of covenant initiation (baptism) is not the spiritual state of the candidate (we are not Baptists). Rather, the basis of the command of the Lord of the church to initiate believers and their children and the promises attached to that sacrament (Gen 17; Acts 2:39). 

What is material to this discussion is how we ought to _regard_ or treat our covenant children. Do we regard/treat them as little reprobates under the divine curse or do we regard them as "holy" (1 Cor 7) and as proper heirs of the promise until they give evidence that they have rejected their inheritance? There is no question whether covenant children are sinful by nature (we are Pauline, Augustinian, and Calvinist) and whether, according to their natural state they deserve eternal condemnation. The question is what promises has God made to his visible, institutional, church and how has he commanded that those promises (and liabilities) be administered.

In distinction from most Baptists, we do not restrict the sign/seal of covenant initiation only to those who have made credible profession of faith of faith. To us, such a restriction is an over-realized eschatology and assumes unnecessarily a substantial disjunction between the New Covenant and the promises given to Abraham, thus unnecessarily and harmfully excluding covenant children from the divinely ordained sphere of the administration of God's covenant promises.

In distinction from the Federal Vision, we administer the signs and seals of covenant membership with the understanding that there is a distinction between the visible and invisible church(es) or, as we used to say, between those who are in the covenant community as Esau was (externally only) and the way Isaac was (externally and internally).

We understand that, according to election, not every baptized person will come to faith and also that, however, all of God's elect will come to faith and realize the promises made and received in baptism.

Blessings,

rsc


----------



## Jie-Huli (Oct 16, 2005)

Many thanks for the thoughtful replies. I believe I understand the Reformed paedobaptist churches much better in this regard now, having read your answers. 

My questions were not meant as objections, by the way, I really just want to understand the paedobaptist view better.

So I gather that Reformed paedobaptist churches and Reformed credo-baptist churches will have essentialy the same requirements for communicant church membership. In paedobaptist churches, children of believers, though baptised into the church as infants, will not be made communicant members of the church until they make a creditable profession of faith.

This being the case, I would be interested to know what are the practical implications in the church of whether the child is baptised as an infant or baptised only upon making the profession of faith. That is, are children baptised as infants really viewed differently in paedobaptist churches than non-baptised children of believers are in credo-baptist churches? Are they treated differently? Exhorted differently?

But I suppose that is another thread entirely. 

Blessings,

Jie-Huli


----------



## pduggan (Oct 18, 2005)

> _Originally posted by R. Scott Clark_
> In distinction from the Federal Vision, we administer the signs and seals of covenant membership with the understanding that there is a distinction between the visible and invisible church(es) or, as we used to say, between those who are in the covenant community as Esau was (externally only) and the way Isaac was (externally and internally).


I'm not sure what you mean.

What practical difference does it make that you acknowledge an 'invisible church' when you administer visible ordinances?

And you said that we regard them as heirs of the covenant. Are we both regarding them as heirs of God's promises, but also regarding them as potential non-heirs?

Also Galatians talks about Ishamael being a member of a different covenant entirely from that that Issac was. So does external/internal capture the differences?

[Edited on 10-18-2005 by pduggan]


----------

