Covenant Child Church Membership

[JML]

I need some assistance understanding the Presbyterian Position. Please correct anything that needs correcting. (Note: this is in the Paedo only forum)

I am under the understanding that once a child is baptized in a Presbyterian church they become a member of the church. This child could, however, end up to not be one of the elect. So, here are my questioins: what happens when down the road the child shows definite signs of being unregenerate? Are they removed from membership? Can they still be members? If so, how long can they be members? Are they members until they reach adulthood?

I know that I am probably coming at this from the wrong mindset considering that I am a Baptist. I also ask these questions not to argue but to get a better understanding of the Presbyterian position that I am not extremely familiar with. Thanks for your help.

 

[Scottish Lass]

Someone will give a better answer than I can, but I know we make a distinction between baptized children and those who have made a public profession of faith. Both baptism and a profession of faith are necessary in most Presbyterian churches for access to the Lord's table and for voting, for example. The former are called non-communicant members and the latter are called communicant members.

 

[MRC]

This is interesting. A member (through infant baptism) could prove to be reprobate at which time they would be in need of discipline. This discipline could ultimately lead to excommunication, according the Matt 18. Is this how presbyterians handle such a situation?

 

[VictorBravo]

This is interesting. A member (through infant baptism) could prove to be reprobate at which time they would be in need of discipline. This discipline could ultimately lead to excommunication, according the Matt 18. Is this how presbyterians handle such a situation?

Moderation

I'll let the question stand, but this is a reminder that only those holding to paedobaptism are to post in this thread.

 

[tcalbrecht]

You might be interested in the article Covenant and Conversion in the Ordained Servant which touches on this subject.

 

[MRC]

This is interesting. A member (through infant baptism) could prove to be reprobate at which time they would be in need of discipline. This discipline could ultimately lead to excommunication, according the Matt 18. Is this how presbyterians handle such a situation?

Moderation

I'll let the question stand, but this is a reminder that only those holding to paedobaptism are to post in this thread.

I did not mean it as a challenge to paedobaptism. I am nearly convinced of the doctrine and wanted to elaborate on the question that was orginally asked. I appologize if I broke the rule.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

All church members are subjects of discipline. Discipline is part of Discipleship. The forms discipline take vary, for example, everyone present for worship is being disciplined by the Word each Lord's Day (for that matter, answering the summons/call to worship is a form of disciplined training).

A child who refuses to submit to the discipline of the church is eventually a candidate for more severe applications of discipline, up to removal. This is a matter of sessional oversight and wisdom according to the situation, and parental authority as well.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

I need some assistance understanding the Presbyterian Position. Please correct anything that needs correcting. (Note: this is in the Paedo only forum)

I am under the understanding that once a child is baptized in a Presbyterian church they become a member of the church. This child could, however, end up to not be one of the elect. So, here are my questioins: what happens when down the road the child shows definite signs of being unregenerate? Are they removed from membership? Can they still be members? If so, how long can they be members? Are they members until they reach adulthood?

I know that I am probably coming at this from the wrong mindset considering that I am a Baptist. I also ask these questions not to argue but to get a better understanding of the Presbyterian position that I am not extremely familiar with. Thanks for your help.

There is a difference in Presbyterian membership. Baptized children are considered non-communicant members, which means that until they demonstrate enough maturity and understanding of faith, they are not allowed to partake of the Lord's Supper or exercize "adult" priviledges in the congregation (i.e. voting). They are to be raised in the Church in the ways of the Lord, taught the need for salvation, and prepared for living adult life as a Christian. Only after they make a public profession of faith will they become communicant members. If a child grows up and refuses to make a profession of faith, then he is not excommunicated, because he is not a communicant member yet. But his name will eventually be removed from the rolls of the church as a non-communicant member, after (ideally) aggressive pursuit and pastoring from the session. But it's not always that clear cut. Sometimes, you can have non-communicant adults who are not hostile, but willing to continue being instructed, and just don't feel they are ready yet for a public profession. So, they remain non-communicant members until they make profession of faith or until the session determines the person is refusing to make a profession at which point they will be erased. Each session handles erasure differently, depending on the specific case.

 

[JML]

There is a difference in Presbyterian membership. Baptized children are considered non-communicant members, which means that until they demonstrate enough maturity and understanding of faith, they are not allowed to partake of the Lord's Supper or exercize "adult" priviledges in the congregation (i.e. voting). They are to be raised in the Church in the ways of the Lord, taught the need for salvation, and prepared for living adult life as a Christian. Only after they make a public profession of faith will they become communicant members. If a child grows up and refuses to make a profession of faith, then he is not excommunicated, because he is not a communicant member yet. But his name will eventually be removed from the rolls of the church as a non-communicant member, after (ideally) aggressive pursuit and pastoring from the session. But it's not always that clear cut. Sometimes, you can have non-communicant adults who are not hostile, but willing to continue being instructed, and just don't feel they are ready yet for a public profession. So, they remain non-communicant members until they make profession of faith or until the session determines the person is refusing to make a profession at which point they will be erased. Each session handles erasure differently, depending on the specific case.

Thank you for the well written explanation.

 

[Peairtach]

John Lanier

I am under the understanding that once a child is baptized in a Presbyterian church they become a member of the church. This child could, however, end up to not be one of the elect.

Apart from our own election which the Bible indicates can be infallibly known to us through the Holy Spirit showing us the marks of our gracious calling in our hearts and lives, it is quite impossible for us to infallibly know that someone else is elect, and is none of our business.

The question many Presbyterian ministers and elders in the Kirk Session will ask in the case of those requesting baptism for themselves or their children, is "Does this person have a credible profession of faith?" In the case of a request for communicant membership, the question will be "Does this person have an accredited profession of faith?"

Since in the case of those adults that come for their own baptism, there is usually also a desire to be allowed to take the Lord's Supper for the first time, the latter question is the one that the Session asks of itself.

Since the opportunity for taking the Lord's Supper for the first time may be some time after baptism is administered, and the right of communication may be properly be withdrawn by the Session or properly declined by a communicant member, baptism to some extent constitutes an outer door of the visible church, whereas the Lord's Supper constitutes an inner door.

This is similar to the relationship between circumcision and the Passover in the OT.

This means that someone who isn't communicating or hasn't taken the Lord's Supper for the first time shouldn't necessarily be refused baptism for his child. E.g. see the case of the Phillipian Jailor.

See the discussion of this by Dr John Kennedy in "The Days of the Fathers in Ross-shire" which is online somewhere. Dabney has a dicussion of what should be done about non-communicant members who go astray in his "Systematic Theology".