# Switching Views, Submission to Leaders, and Saving Church Unity



## Philip A (Mar 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gto_
> Or is this a false either/or? Is there another route of keeping unity?



Do you know that there is a third position, namely, Particular Baptist Covenant Theology? Or let me ask it another way, does your present leaning come from having been convinced of CT, and thinking that PB is a necessary consequence of CT? Are you familiar at all with the Covenant Theology of the original writers of the 1677(89) confession?

Most folks in the Reformed community fall into the fallacy of the undistributed middle on the baptism issue, without realizing that there is a small corner of the church that holds to a Credobaptist Covenant Theology.


----------



## gto (Mar 9, 2005)

Thanks for your response. But I guess I am looking at this more from a method/protocol standpoint rather than engaging the argument itself. I suppose the help I am searching for would be the kind of help that would pertain to either a paedo or credo (of all stripes) who is considering a possible painful change and its consequences. Thanks again, though.


----------



## JohnV (Mar 9, 2005)

gto:

Good questions. May I have at it? 

Please correct me if I'm wrong. What you are asking about is the practical situation the question of baptism leaves you in, with regard to your church relationship; what priorities ought you to have, and how do you maintain the unity of the body (they are true believers even if you think they believe some things wrongly) and still follow after what your heart and conscience convict you of. Is this right? 

Phillip: 
Nicely put. Without making it a contentious point. 

The question, however, would remain the same if gto were changing his mind to PCB from the predominant CB in his congregation, if I understand his dillemma correctly. And apart from the differences in points of view on baptism, our advice to him should still coincide concerning the relationship to the body factor. Do you agree? Well, let's not split the thread.


----------



## Philip A (Mar 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by JohnV_
> The question, however, would remain the same if gto were changing his mind to PCB from the predominant CB in his congregation, if I understand his dillemma correctly. And apart from the differences in points of view on baptism, our advice to him should still coincide concerning the relationship to the body factor. Do you agree? Well, let's not split the thread.



Well said brother, I agree.

I have lately been thinking though the issue of balancing church unity and and proper ecclesiology on one end and doctrinal conviction on the other. I appreciate the irenic tone of this thread, as there is a due attention given to both concerns. GTO, you have given me much to ponder. If my pondering produces anything worthwhile, I will post back again. But for now, I am encouraged by your giving due concern for the church, unity, and proper ecclesiology.


----------



## gto (Mar 9, 2005)

Thank you both for taking the time (and the effort) to hear me aright. JohnV, I'd say you hit the nail quite squarely. I would welcome every thought (or even gut feeling) you guys (and anyone else for that matter) have for me and others with the same tension. Thanks again for the imput.


----------



## JohnV (Mar 10, 2005)

gto: 

The short answer is this: 

Likely the thing that has given you the most reason to think things through on such a monumental thing, one which is trying at very fundamental level, even at the fellowship itself, is the inclusion or place of children in the covenant. Once these things start to work at you, there really is no going back, so to speak. 

I've never been in that situation. I've always been a Pb. But also, I've never been convinced by any of the arguments for Cb. Be that as it may, you have to remember this: what applies to the children of believers must certainly apply to the people who have expressed a true faith in Christ, but are of a different persuasion on baptism. We need to presume the place in the covenant for them too. 

So let's say that Pastor Way and myself are opposites; he's never been convinced of Pb arguments, and I've never been convinced of Cb arguments. Nevertheless, he and I are to be very repsectful of each other in the same way that we regard brothers of the same persuasion as brothers. It is intrinsically part of both of our systems of thought. 

(It has to be, because that is what keeps us from being persuaded of each other's views on baptism, even if we don't understand that about each other's views. But that's another discussion. )

I would say, don't hide your faith, and don't display it either. Try to maintain the fellowship as much as possible. As it is not threatened by your views, do not be threatened by the status quo beyond measure either. Don't hide the books, unless it is for reasons such as your not being ready to discuss it yet, or such as trepidation that it may cause division. Be open, but don't wear it on your sleeve. And back off if it causes anything detrimental to unity.

But there comes a time when you have to break with those who don't hold to the same baptism position. Its only practical that this happens. 

So, the bottom line: as much as it depends on you, don't break the fellowship; as much as it depends on conviction to the truth, you have to follow it with all your heart, and not allow anything to stand in the way of that. You can do both, ideally, by asking for dismissal from your dear fellowship for reasons of conviction, even doing so with tears. But be ready, because the road to Pb is a door-opener in many respects. And in that way it appears relentless. And of itself does not demand that you view non-Pb-ists as non-believers, or as second rate, or as anything other than brothers who are also in the same boat as you, just not able to master all of revelation flawlessly. After all, if you include your children in covenant because God said they are included, then you have to include Cb-ists in the covenant as well, because God said they are included. They have equal status with you in the church. Being more right is no great attribute to boast about, because that is pure grace and it wasn't yours to boast about to begin with.

This will do for openers. I'm sure this will need ironing out and discussion. I'm likely wrong on some things.


----------



## Mantis (Mar 10, 2005)

gto:

I can understand your struggle because I have found myself dealing with many of the same issues. I do not have a solution but I did find JohnV's response to be thoughtful and helpful.


----------



## gto (Mar 11, 2005)

Joshua,

I just checked under Edit Profile and it is still there, name and denomination. I have not been selecting the optional Use Signature? box. It appears as an option along with others. In any case, I just checked my Profile and it is definitely there. Let me know if there is something I need to do. Thanks.


----------



## gto (Mar 11, 2005)

no worries. thanks for the clarification. again, just wanting to maintain some prudence from my end. thanks for understanding.


----------



## Preach (Mar 11, 2005)

Hi Tom. I have walked where you are now. I was a Baptist minister and then converted to covenant theology. It took a while for my heart to catch up with my head (if I may put it that way). 

What John said about the time when the moment comes when you must break away is absolutely true. For example, as I understand it, as of this moment, you are not sure what the Bible teaches regarding the doctrine of baptism and the implications of that doctrine. Therefore, maintain the fellowship, pray and study the issue through. Take your time and be sure of a final decision. What's the rush?

However, the issue is much deper and wider than baptism. It's about a whole lot more. There is a reason why credos and paedos have separate churches. Why do you think this is?

I ask this question just to get a sense of where you are regarding the Biblical implications of holding to paedobaptism.

"In Christ",
Bobby


----------



## JohnV (Mar 11, 2005)

gto:

What Bobby says above is what I would have said. It isn't just baptism after you are more acquainted with it. But we have to be careful that we don't scare you away by indicating some things you might not want to get into just yet. It would be the same the other way around too, with different implications attached. 

The Paedos make it part of their doctrinal standards, the need to baptize the children, and don't feel as if they are imposing upon Scripture at all. In fact we believe that Scripture imposes it upon us, when children are viewed covenantally. Once you're there, there's no going back as far as the demand of logic is concerned. 

But in the meantime there are many reasons for maintaining the unity. In fact, it is in the interest of unity that you will eventually have to make a break. If the rest of your fellowship does not follow your lead, and remain convinced of their view of baptism, and you believe that they are of the body of Christ too, then you eventually have to leave them to practice their faith the best they know how while yo do the same. But the two cannot co-exist in the same body. You can't "have and not have" at the same time. 

Children, you see, are in the covenant and are the responsibility of both the parents and the church. Parents can't practice covenant membership without the church affirming it in every part. It becomes part of the family life to have the church intrinsically involved on her part. Children need to know that they are an integral part of that church family as much as they are part of their blood family. And as the Lord's Supper is indicative of responsible communing membership, so Baptism is indicative of adoptive membership; and it is an important sacrament for the church to witness and participate in. So you can see the practical implications that would follow later, as you become more familiar with covenant implications. 

So for the time being, maintaining the unity can have several advantages; the fellowship may also want to know what you know; the fellowship, by its opposition, will only help you to understand things better (because truth is irresistible); the fellowship may well be enhanced by your views; the movement from one view to another view is kept in check by the loving concern of your brothers (you will soon know if there are other less honorable incentives, either your own or of others), so that you don't get carried away with your "new revelation"; or it may be that this fellowship will correct you in the case that you eventually find that you have been mistaken. You can't toss out the last possibility; even at the late stage of the Pb view that I am in I can not and may not do that. So although I am firmly in the Pb camp, and I must be separate from the Cb fellowship because of that (I have children that must be baptized and be in the covenant) yet I do not break fellowship with them altogether. In fact, some of them are very dear brothers. I trust that our need to worship apart, and our different views on baptism, does not damage our fellowship, and that we remain separate in those ways to the enrichment of both of us, not to our detriment. 

We just can't be both in the same ecclesiastical setting. A church that does both, baptize covenant children and not baptize covenant children does not really know what its all about, obviously. And that would be true for either side of the debate. So it is out of respect that we worship separately, not out of partisanship. At least, that's how it should be. 

That's my view on things, gto. I'm just an ordinary member, not an office-bearer or learned doctor. I'm sure someone of that stature could inform you a lot better than I could. But I hope that I have been helpful in some way.


----------



## Larry Hughes (Mar 19, 2005)

John,

That is very helpful because I understand what Bobby above is saying when head gets ahead of heart when one is convinced by the Word to change over to the other side of the issue. It's all too easy in our sinfulness to despise our former position and let that carry over to those who still remain.

I agree completely with Bobby and yourself as the issue opens up more and more it is not just about baptizing children, rather the whole of Scripture begins to open up in a much different way than before, faith is strengthened, unity and other things. 

Good post!

ldh


----------



## JohnV (Mar 19, 2005)

Thanks, Larry. Just doing my bit. I'm glad that it was helpful.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Apr 13, 2005)

I really need some guidance too. I recently switched to Covenant Theology and Paedobaptism, thanks to Matt (and thanks to various books since reading Matt's articles online).

Like gto, I am currently in a credobaptist church. It is solidly Calvinistic, and is a very good church overall. My wife and I have been going there over 4 years, and we have really close ties to the elders and fellow parishoners.

My biggest current struggle is because of this: I have 3 very young daughters. Two of them are 2 years old (twins), and the other is 1 year old. Amy and I love Katie, Kimberly, and Andrea like crazy, and we want to do a good job as parents, raising them up *Biblically*.

I despise "church hopping". I strongly believe in the unity described in Ephesians 4, and I don't want to leave my church. On the other hand, I believe that my daughters are covenant members, so I want them to be baptized, and to be treated as covenant members.

As for my long-term struggle, it is based on my strong desire to go into the ministry. I truly believe God is calling me to be an ordained minister of the Gospel some years in the future. And my pastor agrees with me. He gave me a very good recommendation to get into Westminster Theological Seminary in Dallas. But if I am ultimately going to be a minister, and I am a paedobaptist, then I am going to be baptizing babies. And in that case, a break with my current church is pretty sure to happen eventually, unless my pastor happens to change his mind too. (We'll see what happens.)

I really appreciate the good advice already given to gto. Do you guys have any additional advice for me, considering that I have 3 young daughters right now? 

A) Should I just get them baptized at my mother-in-law's Presbyterian church, and put off thoughts of leaving my church for a few years? 

B) Should I put off baptism altogether for a few years, while I discuss this issue in-depth with the elders? 

C) Should I consider it radically urgent to get out of my church so I can join a PCA church and get my daughters baptized? 

D) Do you have some other, better idea?

At the moment, I am leaning toward option "B", but am considering option "A". What are your thoughts, advice, suggestions?

Thank you in advance!!!

In Christ,
Joseph M. Gleason


----------

