Paedo-Baptism Answers Covenant baptism age limitations

[Jim6]

My wife and I have been studying topics of covenant theology and baptism over the past 3 years and have come to the reformed conviction that we should baptise our children.
Having navigated the question of “Why baptise?”, we are now trying to navigate the “How do we baptise them?”, question.
We have 6 children aged 12 and under… all of them are willingly and eagerly involved in the spiritual and worshipful aspects of family life like family worship, catechism and church. The eldest 3 or 4 have a sound belief of the rudiments of the faith.
Would you advise a standard Presbyterian paedobaptist approach where we answer the pastors questions on behalf of them all, or should the eldest few answer the questions themselves as believers? (Our pastor doesn’t have a firm conviction either way)
Any wisdom on this topic would be appreciated.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

There is nothing wrong with a child at your side affirmatively answering the questions that are, as a matter of the Book of Church Order, put to you their parents joining that congregation with no restriction. You are joining as communicant members, the children (all?) are not. There will be a time appointed when they will be asked to answer the same questuons for themseves, when they are deemed ready for the Lord's Table.

 

[Deleted member 11804]

There is nothing wrong with a child at your side affirmatively answering the questions that are, as a matter of the Book of Church Order, put to you their parents joining that congregation with no restriction. You are joining as communicant members, the children (all?) are not. There will be a time appointed when they will be asked to answer the same questuons for themseves, when they are deemed ready for the Lord's Table.

If the Lord's table is for baptised believers in good standing with church, than why can't the children partake?

 

[pgwolv]

If the Lord's table is for baptised believers in good standing with church, than why can't the children partake?

1 Cor 11:28-30

 

[Deleted member 11804]

A verse with no context.

Are you implying that anyone who examines himself can partake of the Lord's table?

My question was more so rhetorical, obviously I don't believe in baptizing children, but I also don't have an issue with those who do. I attend a Presbyterian Church, that's part of the PCA, and we partake of the Lord's table every week, but before we do so the pastor always mentions that this isn't the church's table, it's for baptized believers in good standing with the church.

So my question would be: can a child really examine himself who's been baptized, thus partaking into the Lord's table?

Or can unbaptized people partake in the Lord's table?

I'm just trying to understand the logic here.

 

[EvanF]

If the Lord's table is for baptised believers in good standing with church, than why can't the children partake?

Believers make a profession of belief. If they are to become communicant members at the same time they are baptized, they would answer the questions for themselves and make their credible profession to the elders, either before or after the baptism.

Children who are baptized by their parents as an act of covenantal faith are not thereby considered believers by default without an actual profession.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism, question 97, teaches,

"It is required of them that would worthily partake of the Lord’s Supper, that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord’s body, of their faith to feed upon him, of their repentance, love, and new obedience; lest, coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves."

Further, the Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 26, section 2, teaches that the communion of the saints in the body of Christ, which we discern in the celebration of his Supper, is to be extended by those who profess him to all those who in every place likewise call upon the name of Christ.

 

[Ye_Olde_Heidelberger]

Would you advise a standard Presbyterian paedobaptist approach where we answer the pastors questions on behalf of them all, or should the eldest few answer the questions themselves as believers? (Our pastor doesn’t have a firm conviction either way)
Any wisdom on this topic would be appreciated.

I think you should take the standard approach in this instance, having your children receive baptism with you and your wife answering the questions from the forms on their behalf. Children may come under impressions of faith at different stages of life and in varying intensities, but you want to make sure that such faith bears fruit over time. It was my own case where I began to have impressions around the age of 8, but was not soundly converted until I was 18. I am not saying that there is an age restriction on faith, but that there should be some caution applied before admitting your eldest children to the Table.

Continue in your responsibility of having them instructed in the Scripture and Catechism, pray for them to make a sound and credible profession, and involve your eldership through each stage.

If the Lord's table is for baptised believers in good standing with church, than why can't the children partake?

Brother, this is not the right forum for debating baptism, but rather for paedobaptists and ask and answer questions amongst themselves. Please refer to this one instead if you would like to challenge our views: https://puritanboard.com/forums/baptism.57/

 

[Contra_Mundum]

If the Lord's table is for baptised believers in good standing with church, than why can't the children partake?

Because self-examination is also required. Baptism is a necessary but not wholly sufficient standard.

Children in the Old Covenant could not participate in the feasts of the church-state (which events were tied to the altar of Israel), unless they were ceremonially clean--something a child is not able to determine without training in the Law; nor was it a parent's role to decide if a child is "clean enough." Unclean eating was reason for external cutting-off from the covenant.

Self-examination has always been required, and it is the role of church leaders both to facilitate the education of church members, and judge their general fitness.

 

[Deleted member 11804]

Brother, this is not the right forum for debating baptism, but rather for paedobaptists and ask and answer questions amongst themselves. Please refer to this one instead if you would like to challenge our views: https://puritanboard.com/forums/baptism.57/

I was not debating, simply asking a question, which is allowed. Thank you for your insight though, brother. My question has been answered.

Believers make a profession of belief. If they are to become communicant members at the same time they are baptized, they would answer the questions for themselves and make their credible profession to the elders, either before or after the baptism.

Children who are baptized by their parents as an act of covenantal faith are not thereby considered believers by default without an actual profession.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism, question 97, teaches,

"It is required of them that would worthily partake of the Lord’s Supper, that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord’s body, of their faith to feed upon him, of their repentance, love, and new obedience; lest, coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves."

Further, the Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 26, section 2, teaches that the communion of the saints in the body of Christ, which we discern in the celebration of his Supper, is to be extended by those who profess him to all those who in every place likewise call upon the name of Christ.

Thank you, I was misunderstanding the belief part I suppose. In my view baptism is a profession of belief, so I was confused why they are not able to partake in the table, which you've answered, and I now understand, so thank you for that!

Because self-examination is also required. Baptism is a necessary but not wholly sufficient standard.

Children in the Old Covenant could not participate in the feasts of the church-state (which events were tied to the altar of Israel), unless they were ceremonially clean--something a child is not able to determine without training in the Law; nor was it a parent's role to decide if a child is "clean enough." Unclean eating was reason for external cutting-off from the covenant.

Self-examination has always been required, and it is the role of church leaders both to facilitate the education of church members, and judge their general fitness.

Yes, I agree, even for baptized believers, to examine yourself, and why we should examine any unrepented sin before partaking. Thank you for this insight.

 

[Ye_Olde_Heidelberger]

I was not debating, simply asking a question, which is allowed. Thank you for your insight though, brother. My question has been answered.

Glad to hear it, brother! My apologies for misunderstanding the motivation behind your question.

 

[Deleted member 11804]

Glad to hear it, brother! My apologies for misunderstanding the motivation behind your question.

its ok, no need to apologize. Was just trying to learn a particular reasoning. I understand sometimes though, through text, its difficult to narrate emotion, thus giving off wrong ideas.

 

[EvanF]

Thank you, I was misunderstanding the belief part I suppose. In my view baptism is a profession of belief, so I was confused why they are not able to partake in the table, which you've answered, and I now understand, so thank you for that!

You're very welcome! I suspected there was a disconnect caused by long usage of thinking baptism and belief to be properly inseparable. Presbyterians consider the two sacraments to be different both in significance and in the proper recipients of each. This difference in belief about the sacraments has unfortunately lead some former baptists to embrace paedo-communion when they become convinced of paedo-baptism.

 

[Jim6]

So if our older two were wanting to start having communion, it would be more suitable for them to be baptized and the questions directed at them? Obviously only if the elders were happy with their confession of faith.

Otherwise usually there would be another event where they would publicly profess faith before partaking of the Lords table?

 

[EvanF]

So if our older two were wanting to start having communion, it would be more suitable for them to be baptized and the questions directed at them? Obviously only if the elders were happy with their confession of faith.

Otherwise usually there would be another event where they would publicly profess faith before partaking of the Lords table?

I've never seen any public profession apart from a baptism in any presbyterian church I've attended. If the profession happens with the elders before the baptism, the questions and answers in the baptism would be the public profession, but if for some reason the baptism is given first and the baptized answers the questions, that would be the public profession and the elders would satisfy themselves later, perhaps after a communicant class. I think in most cases believers undergoing baptism have already been counseled and examined by the elders.

For unprofessing children who receive baptism, there is usually no separate public profession if they subsequently make a profession before the elders.

 

[EvanF]

I've never seen any public profession apart from a baptism in any presbyterian church I've attended.

Looking at the PCA BCO, I find in 57-4,

"It is recommended, as edifying and proper, that baptized persons, when admitted by the Session to the Lord’s Supper, make a public profession of their faith in the presence of the congregation. But in all cases, there should be a clear recognition of their previous relation to the church as baptized members."

But again, I don't recall ever seeing any public profession of faith of any children who grew up in the church, and don't believe I ever made one after being examined by the elders until I was later asked to share one upon becoming a comunicant member of a reformed baptist church. It honestly seems like a good idea, for the sake of better discerning the body.

 

[Jim6]

.

For unprofessing children who receive baptism, there is usually no separate public profession if they subsequently make a profession before the

There is nothing wrong with a child at your side affirmatively answering the questions that are, as a matter of the Book of Church Order, put to you their parents joining that congregation with no restriction. You are joining as communicant members, the children (all?) are not. There will be a time appointed when they will be asked to answer the same questuons for themseves, when they are deemed ready for the Lord's Table.

Are you suggesting those who would be communicant members answering the questions, while us parents answering the questions for the younger ones?

 

[EvanF]

Are you suggesting those who would be communicant members answering the questions, while us parents answering the questions for the younger ones?

Yes, if some of the children are ready to profess faith, I don't see why they shouldn't answer for themselves.

 

[Deleted member 11804]

You're very welcome! I suspected there was a disconnect caused by long usage of thinking baptism and belief to be properly inseparable. Presbyterians consider the two sacraments to be different both in significance and in the proper recipients of each. This difference in belief about the sacraments has unfortunately lead some former baptists to embrace paedo-communion when they become convinced of paedo-baptism.

Ahh. I see how that could be confusing for Baptist when converting over. Thanks again always great to understand other's views who are brothers/sisters in the faith.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Are you suggesting those who would be communicant members answering the questions, while us parents answering the questions for the younger ones?

You and your wife (presuming slightly here) are joining the church, and as a matter of public reception a visible recognition of that fact is offered to the whole congregation (formal agreement to reception takes place when the elders interviewed and voted).

Your children come with you, they are part of you (both). Regardless of age, they will be members if they are under your roof and authority. If they are still wholly accountable to you as parents. But they will not automatically be communicant members. They ought to be baptized, and if they aren't this rite will ordinarily be conducted on this day of reception.

But perhaps one child or more is ready to join as a mature person with his parents on their day of reception. In which case, they should be directed by the elders to answer for themselves, and they will be enrolled in the body as communicant members. If your 4yr old stands by your knee and says Yes when you do, this is not a sin or untoward. But it isn't required, expected, or much meaningful other than sentimentally.