A Good Day of Worship

This past Lord's Day was particularly sweet. I preached on "The Woman Who Fears the Lord," from Proverbs 31:10-31 as a part of a larger series titled, "Biblical Manhood, Biblical Womanhood, and the Family." We had a great crowd of people in attendance, and I had the great honor of baptizing a young man named Caleb. I pray for more gatherings like this one.

Baptism, Communion, & Local Church Membership

A debate has been circling the blogs regarding the relationship between Baptism, Communion, and Local Church Membership. It began as far as I can tell when John Piper responded through the Desiring God Blog to the change made in Wayne Grudem's systematic theology textbook concerning baptism. Previously, Grudem wrote in favor of allowing both credobaptistic and paedobaptistic views to be allowed within a single denomination and its local churches. However, he has personally changed his view. The compromise within a local church to allow both seems to be too great for the credo-baptist.

The meat of Piper's response comes when he says:

When I weigh the kind of imperfection involved in tolerating an invalid baptism because some of our members are deeply persuaded that it is biblically valid, over against the kind of imperfection involved in saying to a son or daughter of the living God, “You are excluded from the local church,” my biblical sense is that the latter is more unthinkable than the former. The local church is a visible expression of the invisible, universal, body of Christ. To exclude from it is virtually the same as excommunication. And no serious church takes excommunication as an invitation to attend the church down the street.

You can find Grudem's response to Piper's here. It was both humorous and humble when Grudem said that his own wife found Piper's argument more persuasive. For a more comprehensive and detailed report of Piper's own understanding on this issue you can research these resources.

Since this foray, others have weighed in on the discussion. Over at 9 Marks Blog, you can find two entries by Mark Dever here and here. You can also find two good posts regarding this issue from a historical perspective written by Aaron Menikoff (Part 1 & Part 2).

In Menikoff's articles he references John Bunyan, author of of the famed Pilgrim's Progress, who made significant arguments why paedo-baptists should not be barred from the membership or communion of a local baptist church titled, Differences in Water Baptism No Bar to Communion (1673).

Sam Storms has weighed in with an article asking how these men (Piper, Dever, Mohler, Duncan) can really be Together for the Gospel if Dever and Mohler would not permit Duncan to receive communion at their church (because they do not believe infant baptism constitutes a real baptism and one must receive believer's baptism before one receives communion). Meanwhile, Ligon Duncan has stated that his response will be forthcoming.

My own view is fairly traditional within modern baptist circles. The church I pastor requires baptism by immersion after the evidence of genuine faith in Jesus Christ in order to become a member of the church and to participate in communion. However, we do not police the elements in such a way that a visiting Presbyterian could not participate although I would make it clear from the beginning before the elements are passed out what our church's view is.

Like Grudem's wife though, I find Piper and Bunyan's arguments to be weighty and biblical. I also find it contradictory to prohibit a Presbyterian from communion at the church I pastor, but would allow him to preach at the church I pastor, which I have done. This past summer I invited both a Presbyterian and Methodist to preach while I was out of town.

My hope is that this current debate will spark much fruit from future and current Ph.D students who will try to tackle these issues afresh in our day. Until then, I will be examining the more thorough writings that have been offered by Christians past.

Update: Ligon Duncan has begun his post series on why he, Piper, Mohler, and Dever can be Together for the Gospel but not together on various other doctrines.

Should Baptism Divide Us?

Dr. Greg Wills recently lectured and fielded questions on this topic at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where he teaches Historical Theology. The title of his lecture is titled, Should the Water Divide Us? Baptism, Church Membership, and the Glory of Christ. Dr. Wills addresses the following three issues related to Baptism:

1. Is immersion essential to Baptism?
2. May we admit persons to church membership and the Lord's Supper who have not been immersed?
3. Does the administrator matter?

This is a timely address considering the many debates that have recently arisen in Baptist life such as Bethlehem Baptist Church's recent move in the direction (although not adopted to date) to allow for convinced Paedobaptists to join the church, the recent moves by some Baptist churches to accept believer's who were sprinkled instead of immersed into church membership, and the recent debate regarding the new IMB Baptism policy, specifically on the issue of whether or not a baptism is legitimate if the baptizing church did not endorse the doctrine of eternal security.

I will update the post with his answers after I listen to the address today.

Update

Question 1.
Dr. Wills argues that when we enter into a mode debate we are unnecessarily giving ground away in the debate. Wills argues that baptism is the immersion of a believer in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Therefore there is no other legitimate mode.

Question 2.
Dr. Wills argues that only those who have been properly baptized can be received into the local church membership and partake in the Lord's Supper. He says the one who has not been immersed or the one has never been baptized as a believer, or one who has misunderstood the doctrine of Baptism (those who claim Baptism is regenerative) are in unrepentant sin and therefore ought not be allowed to partake of the Lord's Supper.

Question 3.
Wills says the administrator does matter. His personal view is that the ordinances should be administered by the recognized ministers of the local church. However he does not teach the illegitimacy of a baptism administered by a lay-person if the local church approves of it. He thinks it is unwise.

Wills aptly prefaces his address by saying that Baptism is not on the same level as other doctrinal issues, but he believes the doctrine is important as all teachings of Christ are important. We should strive to submit correctly to every commandment given by Scripture.

Wills does answer a question pointed at the IMB issue. He is not personally convinced of the necessity on the policy concerning eternal security, but he does believe the IMB has the right to adopt it. Furthermore, he says that if his own church adopted the same policy, he would submit to it.