May unbelievers have their children baptized (for Paedo's only)

[BertMulder]

May those who are unregenerate, and yet have done 'confession of faith', and are thus otherwise 'members in good standing' present their infant children for baptism?

By extension, may those that are able to do an intellectual 'confession of faith', without knowing Christ as their Redeemer, be admitted to church membership?

(am involved in a debate about this on a Dutch forum - refoforum.nl • Toon onderwerp - Mogen ongelovigen hun kinderen laten dopen?

and wish to see if the insights and opinions here differ...)

 

[BertMulder]

Joshua, we are here talking about those churches that admit people as members on a academic confession only, while by their own admission they are unregenerate.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I believe that is the very thing we are not allowed to judge. If someone says they have faith in Christ we must accept them as a brother. If they are acting in a way that is contrary to how a regenerate person should live they should be shown their error by their elders in scripture. However, I don't believe one can tell one who confesses that they believe in Christ that they are not saved. The name of Christ is far too powerful for that. We should use scripture to convict any possible unbelievers in our midst. They will either repent and stay or rebel and leave. If they refuse to recant then they are subject to Church discipline.

John 3:18 KJV
[18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

1 John 2:3-6 KJV
[3] And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
[4] He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
[5] But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
[6] He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

-----Added 10/6/2009 at 06:21:53 EST-----

Joshua, we are here talking about those churches that admit people as members on a academic confession only, while by their own admission they are unregenerate.

If they believe they are unregenerate why would they want to join a Church?

 

[toddpedlar]

Joshua, we are here talking about those churches that admit people as members on a academic confession only, while by their own admission they are unregenerate.

If they fully admit they are unregenerate then the church is utterly in the wrong to accept them as members in good standing in the first place. Therein is the problem then - what such churches do vis a vis baptism is completely unimportant... there are much bigger fish to fry.

 

[BertMulder]

I believe that is the very thing we are not allowed to judge. If someone says they have faith in Christ we must accept them as a brother. If they are acting in a way that is contrary to how a regenerate person should live they should be shown their error by their elders in scripture. However, I don't believe one can tell one who confesses that they believe in Christ that they are not saved. The name of Christ is far too powerful for that. We should use scripture to convict any possible unbelievers in our midst. They will either repent and stay or rebel and leave. If they refuse to recant then they are subject to Church discipline.

John 3:18 KJV
[18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

1 John 2:3-6 KJV
[3] And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
[4] He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
[5] But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
[6] He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

-----Added 10/6/2009 at 06:21:53 EST-----

Joshua, we are here talking about those churches that admit people as members on a academic confession only, while by their own admission they are unregenerate.

If they believe they are unregenerate why would they want to join a Church?

David, they by their own open admission are 'comfortably unconverted'...

They (generally) do not celebrate communion, yet wish their children to be baptized....

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Joshua, we are here talking about those churches that admit people as members on a academic confession only, while by their own admission they are unregenerate.

If they fully admit they are unregenerate then the church is utterly in the wrong to accept them as members in good standing in the first place. Therein is the problem then - what such churches do vis a vis baptism is completely unimportant... there are much bigger fish to fry.

This is a weird scenario. Because you have to confess faith in Christ to join a Christian Church, you must be regenerate to make that confession because regeneration PRECEEDS faith, not the other way around. So, I don't think this scenario could happen in an orthodox Church.

 

[ewenlin]

Elder Mulder, are you referring to people who confess both faith and a-faith ?

Isn't that... contradicting?


David: There are many differing definitions of faith and I don't think Elder Mulder is referring to saving faith in this case.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I believe that is the very thing we are not allowed to judge. If someone says they have faith in Christ we must accept them as a brother. If they are acting in a way that is contrary to how a regenerate person should live they should be shown their error by their elders in scripture. However, I don't believe one can tell one who confesses that they believe in Christ that they are not saved. The name of Christ is far too powerful for that. We should use scripture to convict any possible unbelievers in our midst. They will either repent and stay or rebel and leave. If they refuse to recant then they are subject to Church discipline.

John 3:18 KJV
[18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

1 John 2:3-6 KJV
[3] And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
[4] He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
[5] But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
[6] He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

-----Added 10/6/2009 at 06:21:53 EST-----

Joshua, we are here talking about those churches that admit people as members on a academic confession only, while by their own admission they are unregenerate.

If they believe they are unregenerate why would they want to join a Church?

David, they by their own open admission are 'comfortably unconverted'...

They (generally) do not celebrate communion, yet wish their children to be baptized....

So, they openly admit that they do not believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God lived to perfection and obediently died for sinners to satisfy the requirements of the law?

 

[BertMulder]

Elder Mulder, are you referring to people who confess both faith and a-faith ?

Isn't that... contradicting?

yeah.

They do an 'academic confession', also called a 'historic faith' in some circles. They do not confess to belong to Christ, but instead they confess that they 'need conversion'.... and confess that they are still dead in their sins....

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Elder Mulder, are you referring to people who confess both faith and a-faith ?

Isn't that... contradicting?

yeah.

They do an 'academic confession', also called a 'historic faith' in some circles. They do not confess to belong to Christ, but instead they confess that they 'need conversion'.... and confess that they are still dead in their sins....

I would then say that they cannot be addmitted to a Church because they don't have faith that Christ has saved them. In baptism do they not have to promise that they will raise their children as christians? How can they promise that if they are not christians?

 

[ewenlin]

Elder Mulder, are you referring to people who confess both faith and a-faith ?

Isn't that... contradicting?

yeah.

They do an 'academic confession', also called a 'historic faith' in some circles. They do not confess to belong to Christ, but instead they confess that they 'need conversion'.... and confess that they are still dead in their sins....

I think a realization of one's own sinfulness and deadness is the first sign of saving faith being wrought upon. Though just not to the point of fully being assured of redemption fully accomplished and applied for them in a personal way.

Not till they are aware of their inclusion in the Covenant themselves, I'd withhold their children baptism. But I'm no Presbyterian elder, so my words aren't worth much. Hehe.

I'd agree there are bigger fish to fry.

 

[DavidinKnoxville]

No. Neither parent is a believer thus their children are not holy.

"For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy."

- I Corinthians 7:14

 

[PresbyDane]

The state church over here baptizes everything, but I say no!
the parets need to be believers!

 

[MW]

Baptism belongs to all those who profess the true religion and their children. The question of regeneration should not enter into it.

Samuel Rutherford: "All the Infants borne within the visible Church, what ever be the wickednesse of their nearest Parents, are to be received within the Church by Baptisme."

 

[BertMulder]

Baptism belongs to all those who profess the true religion and their children. The question of regeneration should not enter into it.

Samuel Rutherford: "All the Infants borne within the visible Church, what ever be the wickednesse of their nearest Parents, are to be received within the Church by Baptisme."

Even if the council of the church determine they are lying, in that they can not honestly answer to the required questions?

 

[jwithnell]

If this is within your own church, that church leadership needs to exercise the gentle discipline to make sure these folks know the danger of their position. And no, the children should not be baptized. If you are observing another congregation, we might be observing a sad circle of adults being admitted into membership because the congregation is "loving" and "inclusive" so the children would be baptized, likely grow up as unbelievers, then start the sad process all over again -- if indeed they'll have anything to do with religion.

 

[Nathan Riese]

Belief is spiritual, not academic.
Confession is based on the spiritual, not the academic.
I am concerned that this question is even being asked. There is no spiritual ground for baptism on the basis of "academic confession."

Ever heard of the Law of Non-contradiction? You can't be A and Not-A at the same time and in the same sense.

They cannot confess that Jesus is the Lord of their life, that they have repented of their sins, and that they faithfully trust in Jesus' death and resurrection as the perfect Lamb who is God AND at the same time not confess that. It annuls itself out of its own basic contradiction.

A confession bears out of a spiritual change. Although we cannot measure whether regeneration has truly happened or not, if they openly confess to the negation of Christ as their Savior, then a reasonable judgment would be to the neglecting of allowing baptism for them (if not done already) and for their children until a reasonable judgment by the presbyters can be made.

 

[fredtgreco]

Wouldn't WCF 21.4 be applicable here?

Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized. (emphasis added)

Believing appears to get at more than a profession or membership in the visible Church. Membership in the visible church is required, of course, but it is not the end. That is not to say that we believe we can know with infallibility the regeneration of persons, but rather we look to both profession and obedience to that professions:

WLC 166. Unto whom is baptism to be administered?
A. Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him, but infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, and obedience to him, are in that respect within the covenant, and to be baptized. (Emphasis added)

If the parents are not in obedience to Christ and showing fruit of their profession, their child should not be baptized, and they should be disciplined.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Is this church a victim of Dutch High Calvinism? (i.e. that strand that says you can't possibly have assurance of salvation or take communion until you are 90 years old?)

If so, then I would ask more probing questions about their faith than just what they "know" of their experience. Some may actually be putting all their hope in Christ, but becasue they haven't had a conversion "experience" they doubt their salvation. But the fact they say they are "comfortably unconverted" would seem to indicate not a lack of assurance but a genuine lack of faith.

If in fact they are professing to not be Christians, then they must be excommunicated if they are members, or not permitted to become members if they are seeking it. It sounds like (and this is just conjecture based upon the info you have provided) they are only pursing a cultural or traditional Christianity for the sake of satisfying family tradition or superstition. Their children would not be elegible for baptism because they are not professing believers.

 

[BertMulder]

Is this church a victim of Dutch High Calvinism? (i.e. that strand that says you can't possibly have assurance of salvation or take communion until you are 90 years old?)

If so, then I would ask more probing questions about their faith than just what they "know" of their experience. Some may actually be putting all their hope in Christ, but becasue they haven't had a conversion "experience" they doubt their salvation. But the fact they say they are "comfortably unconverted" would seem to indicate not a lack of assurance but a genuine lack of faith.

If in fact they are professing to not be Christians, then they must be excommunicated if they are members, or not permitted to become members if they are seeking it. It sounds like (and this is just conjecture based upon the info you have provided) they are only pursing a cultural or traditional Christianity for the sake of satisfying family tradition or superstition. Their children would not be elegible for baptism because they are not professing believers.

Thank you, Pat.

And in answer to Joshua as well,

The situation is a combination of both. In that it is common, no the majority of the members of the 'conservative' churches of the reformed churches in the Netherlands are unregenerate by their own admission. There may be perhaps 5% (or less) who profess to be regenerate.

The (historical) cause of this is because of a number of factors. There is the case which you brought up, Patrick, that many members, who you and I would take as being sincere christians, simply lack any assurance of faith, because of so called 'Dutch high calvinism'. The preaching is very much contributing to that, by 'knocking down' anyone who cannot give a 'credible conversion experience', in fear of 'going to hell with an imagined heaven'.

Which leads to a preaching which is leaving the membership without any hope. If the Holy Spirit works in them, the church will discredit that work.

In addition, there is the factor that already in the 16th century, shortly after the reformation, the state leaned on the church to not question prospective members on their inner life, but limit the confession of faith to academic knowledge and outward behavior. While this was never officially accepted (the request was before the 1578 Synod of Dordt), it did become practice in many churches, especially as secular benefits were attached to church membership (the state church phenonemon). Which also, in a certain sense, led to arminianism and all the upheaval associated with that....

In adddition, there is the cultural aspect. In order not to make waves, one makes confession of faith, goes along with friends and family, leads an outward christian life....

But there are also those, who although they maybe only attend church once a year or less, still find it important to have their children baptized... of course, out of custom or superstition...)

 

[MW]

Even if the council of the church determine they are lying, in that they can not honestly answer to the required questions?

If "profession of the true religion" is the only prerequisite, "the council of the church" really should not be asking the kinds of personal questions which might require one to lie about their personal condition. Once the door is opened to examining the spiritual estate and experience of individuals all kinds of personal prejudice can enter into the process, which can result in tearing the true wheat out of the field of the kingdom.

 

[MW]

WLC 166. Unto whom is baptism to be administered?
A. Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him, but infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, and obedience to him, are in that respect within the covenant, and to be baptized. (Emphasis added)

If the parents are not in obedience to Christ and showing fruit of their profession, their child should not be baptized, and they should be disciplined.

WLC 166 says nothing about fruit. It only requires profession.

 

[MW]

I still don't understand that there are Reformed Churches out there who accept unregenerate (self-professed) folks into the visible church membership?

Joshua, you need to spend some time in traditional churches where assurance of salvation is a real struggle for folk who have been brought up with the full gospel. Then I think you will understand the problem better.

 

[BertMulder]

Even if the council of the church determine they are lying, in that they can not honestly answer to the required questions?

If "profession of the true religion" is the only prerequisite, "the council of the church" really should not be asking the kinds of personal questions which might require one to lie about their personal condition. Once the door is opened to examining the spiritual estate and experience of individals all kinds of personal prejudice can enter into the process, which can result in tearing the true wheat out of the field of the kingdom.

The required questions at a 'confession of faith' being:

1. Do you acknowledge the doctrine contained in the Old and New Testaments and in the Articles of the Christian faith and taught here in this Christian Church to be the true and complete doctrine of salvation?
2. Have you resolved by the grace of God to adhere to this doctrine; to reject all heresies repugnant thereto and to lead a new, godly life?
3. Will you submit to church government, and in case you should be delinquent (which may God graciously forbid) to church discipline?

How can an unbeliever answer sincerely to these questions? Especially the second question, as it asks the candidate about a 'new, godly life'?

Just as in the questions prior to the baptism:

Beloved in the Lord Jesus Christ, you have heard that baptism is an ordinance of God, to seal unto us and to our seed his covenant; therefore it must be used for that end, and not our of custom or superstition. That it may then be manifest, that you are thus minded, you are to answer sincerely to these questions:

First. Whether you acknowledge, that although our children are conceived and born in sin, and therefore are subject to all miseries, yea, to condemnation itself; yet that they are sanctified [My children. Ezek. 16:21. They are holy. I Cor. 7:14.] in Christ, and therefore, as members of his Church ought to be baptized?

Secondly. Whether you acknowledge the doctrine which is contained in the Old and New Testament, and in the articles of the Christian faith, and which is taught here in this Christian Church, to be the true and perfect [Dutch-- Volkomene, complete.] doctrine of salvation?

Thirdly. Whether you promise and intend to see these children, when come to the years of discretion (whereof you are either parent or witness), instructed and brought up in the aforesaid doctrine, or help or cause them to be instructed therein, to the utmost of your power?

How can the parents answer this sincerely, if they are unregenerate? As the unregenerate could not baptize their children except due to custom or superstition?

These are not tricky, misleading or intrusive questions, to 'trick' the candidate or disparage their salvation....

Sadly enough, however, as also posted above, many of the involved churches have the practice of disparaging the eternal salvation of their members, if their 'salvation experience' is not convincing enough. Thus discouraging those people from assurance of salvation, since any indication by them that they are converted will only meet with official disbelief. Thus the church councils do sit in judgment on the heart, but still permit, no encourage, confession of faith and (infant) baptism. Those people, however, will often encounter severe problems if they dare to approach the Lord's Table.... Since they could not 'communicate' their salvation experience to the elders and minister....

 

[MW]

The required questions at a 'confession of faith' being:

1. Do you acknowledge the doctrine contained in the Old and New Testaments and in the Articles of the Christian faith and taught here in this Christian Church to be the true and complete doctrine of salvation?
2. Have you resolved by the grace of God to adhere to this doctrine; to reject all heresies repugnant thereto and to lead a new, godly life?
3. Will you submit to church government, and in case you should be delinquent (which may God graciously forbid) to church discipline?

How can an unbeliever answer sincerely to these questions? Especially the second question, as it asks the candidate about a 'new, godly life'?

It depends on what is meant by "unbeliever." If it is one who does not believe these declarations, then no, he has no right to baptism. But if he is one who believes these declarations, but has not come to a point of personal assurance as to being in a state of salvation, then yes, he should be baptised because he can answer these questions honestly.

First. Whether you acknowledge, that although our children are conceived and born in sin, and therefore are subject to all miseries, yea, to condemnation itself; yet that they are sanctified [My children. Ezek. 16:21. They are holy. I Cor. 7:14.] in Christ, and therefore, as members of his Church ought to be baptized?

Ezekiel 16:21 states, "That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them?" They are God's children notwithstanding the wickedness of the parents.

 

[fredtgreco]

WLC 166. Unto whom is baptism to be administered?
A. Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him, but infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, and obedience to him, are in that respect within the covenant, and to be baptized. (Emphasis added)

If the parents are not in obedience to Christ and showing fruit of their profession, their child should not be baptized, and they should be disciplined.

WLC 166 says nothing about fruit. It only requires profession.

Actually it does. The bolded portion is clearly that. If it were to be somehow a "profession of obedience" (which is an odd concept) the language would be "professing faith in Christ and obedience to him" The comma clearly delineates it as two things: (1) a profession of faith, and (2) obedience to Christ (which shows the fruit of that profession).

This issue is precisely that faced in the halfway-covenant in colonial America.

But that does not mean that one who simply lacks assurance (as it is not of the "essence of faith") should have his children denied baptism. I took the OP to be a case where the parent has professed to be "comfortably unconverted" and who are "by their own admission they are unregenerate." I further took as evidence the fact that they do not take communion.

 

[MW]

If it were to be somehow a "profession of obedience" (which is an odd concept) the language would be "professing faith in Christ and obedience to him" The comma clearly delineates it as two things: (1) a profession of faith, and (2) obedience to Christ (which shows the fruit of that profession).

The Latin of the Shorter Catechism is as follows: "donec se in Christum credere, eique obedientes fore professi fuerint." This is not an "odd concept," but traditional reformed teaching.

 

[BertMulder]

My misunderstanding was in the context of what I understood to be professing unbelievers, not those who were merely struggling with assurance.

Correct Joshua, we are here taling about those who profess to be unregenerate. Although it may include those who lack assurance to such an extent that they deny any work of regeneration in themselves.

So perhaps it can be divided into 3 groups:

Those that are sincere christians, but due to their church environment, do not dare to say they are converted.

Those that, due to the circumstances they are in, are struggling with assurance to a severe extent, denying any work of regeneration in themselves.

Those that truly are 'comfortably unconverted', only go to church to fit the cultural pattern, etc.

 

[Montanablue]

David, they by their own open admission are 'comfortably unconverted'...

They (generally) do not celebrate communion, yet wish their children to be baptized....

My aunts on my father's side are "comfortably unconverted" but have had their children baptized in the PCUSA because our family is Presbyterian (in name only - no one besides my father is actually a Christian and my father isn't even Presbyterian, but our grandparents, great-grandparents etc always attended a Presbyterian church). I actually think this is pretty common... Lots of people expect their children to be baptized and confirmed without actually believing that any of its valid, they just do it because its tradition in their family.

 

[MW]

Lots of people expect their children to be baptized and confirmed without actually believing that any of its valid, they just do it because its tradition in their family.

That is true. Some of these people are later led to take their tradition seriously and are eventually brought to gospel conversion. In their cases, the faithfulness of God to His ordinance is clearly demonstrated. The unfaithfulness of others should not nullify the ordinance of God.