6 comments

1. The URC should stop communing people that presently couldn’t be members. The reasons for Reformed confessional communicant membership entail Reformed (“close”) confessional communion.
   I’m looking for a congregation that also believes and practices the latter.
   I can help talk Chad or any minister or elder through it, if they’re interested.

   • I doubt anyone is interested. We have ecclesiastical bodies that make these decisions, we don’t look to random people on the internet to solve these problems.

2. What a refreshing discussion, thank you. As a relatively new URC member, and a curious comparative religion nerd, your discussion was a great example of sharing your beliefs and reconciling differences. Thank you both.

3. A discussion of pedo baptism and pedo communion would be great! Ty for the great discussions and pleasant demeanor.

   • Hi Jamie,

     Paedocommunion is essentially a Baptist mistake (also made by the Orthodox churches in reverse). I say Baptist mistake because it conflates two signs with two distinct functions. The signs of circumcision and baptism were and are signs of admission to the visible covenant community. The Baptists confuse the two by treating baptism as a sign of renewal and not admission. Baptism, in the Baptist tradition, is the sign that one has been renewed by the Spirit (as far as they can tell). This is why, in many Baptist churches, the Lord’s Supper is more or less irrelevant. It is nothing more than an annual memorial, as it was in the SBC congregation where I came to faith. Paedocommunion makes a similar mistake by treating Holy Communion as a sign of admission to the covenant community instead of a sign of renewal.

     Baptism is the New Covenant circumcision.

     The Lord’s Supper/Holy Communion is the New Covenant feast.

     The feasts were signs of covenant renewal. Circumcision was the sign of covenant admission.

     The single best treatment of paedocommunion is Cornelis Venema’s book. Here is an extended review/synopsis.

   • Hi Jamie,

     Paedocommunion is essentially a Baptist mistake (also made by the Orthodox churches in reverse). I say Baptist mistake because it conflates two signs with two distinct functions. The signs of circumcision and baptism were and are signs of admission to the visible covenant community. The Baptists confuse the two by treating baptism as a sign of renewal and not admission. Baptism, in the Baptist tradition, is the sign that one has been renewed by the Spirit (as far as they can tell). This is why, in many Baptist churches, the Lord’s Supper is more or less irrelevant. It is nothing more than an annual memorial, as it was in the SBC congregation where I came to faith. Paedocommunion makes a similar mistake by treating Holy Communion as a sign of admission to the covenant community instead of a sign of renewal.

     Baptism is the New Covenant circumcision.

     The Lord’s Supper/Holy Communion is the New Covenant feast.

     The feasts were signs of covenant renewal. Circumcision was the sign of covenant admission.

     The single best treatment of paedocommunion is Cornelis Venema’s book. Here is an extended review/synopsis.

Comments are closed.