In an article in the latest 9Marks e-journal, Mark Dever makes this statement:
“I have many dear paedo-baptists friends from whom I have learned much. Yet I see their practice as a sinful (though sincere) error from which God protects them by allowing for inconsistency in their doctrinal system, just as he graciously protects me from consistency with my own errors.”
It is a statement that has gotten him in trouble with several upstanding bloggers. That said, in my humble opinion, it is really nothing new or controversial (as Dever has sought to explain in this follow up post). Those who (by conviction) practice believers baptism only think that paedobaptized Christians (who are never subsequently baptized upon conversion) are in sin for never having been truly baptized. That is what it means to be a baptist by conviction. Meanwhile, those who practice paedobaptism by conviction (like R. Scott Clark) believe that baptists are in sin for not applying the sign of the covenant (baptism) to their children. By this logic, my wife and I are in sin for not baptizing our three-year old daughter or eighteen-month old son.
So there you have it. Each thinks the other is in unintentional sin. Nevertheless, each is able (or should be able) to work with the other for the good of the gospel’s witness in the world, as we look forward to the perfect unity of heaven. This, I think, is the right way to be “together for the gospel.” Saying we are united in Christ doesn’t mean that we disregard our convictions. On the contrary, true “tolerance” is loving a brother in Christ while remaining firmly convinced that he is wrong in this or that — even as you pray that he loves and receives you in spite of your errors (of which you are not entirely aware).
Update: This post has been updated to correct the suggestion that James Grant practices paedobaptism. Mr. Grant is in fact a Baptist (God bless him….).
FREE SHIPPING!
Good, even-handed analysis. I think we should always hope and pray that God will give us insight to see the truth in these matters, but on an issue like this, we can certainly work together.
Also, great recognition of what true tolerance is, Alex.
Sorry for the delay in responding to this, but we had a baby!!
Just a few things of clarification. I pastor a baptist church, believe it or not! But our Baptist church is rather open to this issue since we allow different Christians from different traditions to take communion, which is not uncommon in Baptist churches, but is a strict position at SBTS and teachers there (or other Baptist contexts).
My concern with Dever’s language was not that there is not an issue of sin. Sure there is. But we have to be careful how we speak of others and sin, and by placing it in a list with only racism and universalism, it placed infant baptism in a bad category.
The other concern is with our Baptist position on this generally speaking. Although paedobaptist would say you are in sin for not baptizing your infant, that is not an ongoing sin. Your infant will soon be baptized (more than likely, depending upon what type of Baptist church you are in). At that point it is a non-issue in a Presbyterian church. You can join and not worry about it.
But the opposite is not true within a Baptist church. There “sin” is never a non-issue. In many/most Baptist churches, someone baptized as an infant can never join or never take communion. On top of that, someone baptized in any other mode other than immersion cannot join or take communion either. And further, according to Nettles (and other Baptists that hold to the notion of alien immersion), someone immersed as a believer in a church that practices infant baptism has to be rebaptized (or in their terminology, formally baptized for the first time).
Those considerations, for me, place the issue in a different situation. Unintentional as it may be, it is a different type of sin from the paedo side of the equation than the credo side because it bars people from communion and membership on the credo side. That is an important issue for me, and I think that issue of catholicity is an important issue for the church.
James,
Thanks a lot for this clarification. And I’m sorry that I previously said you practiced paedobaptism. I am not sure why I thought that. I’ve corrected the post.
Alex
Alex,
It’s good to see you on a blog. The content here on baptism is of particular interest to me, and I have an ongoing series about it at mine. I’ll be dropping back in regularly to see what you’re up to.
Steve Scott