Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Presbyterians are not the only ones that have Terms

Expand Messages
  • puritanone
    ... Infant ... Quite right, Edgar. The church should excommunicate those who have fallen into the error of heresy and schism (I Corinthians 5:6-13, 11:19 ).
    Message 1 of 2 , May 9, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Ic
      Neltococayotl" <puritanpresbyterian@...> wrote:
      >
      > Nor should we
      > commune with them at the Table who deny this Covenant Truth of
      Infant
      > Baptism found in the Word of God.
      >
      > Calvin was clear on this as well.


      Quite right, Edgar.

      The church should excommunicate those who have fallen into the error
      of heresy and schism (I Corinthians 5:6-13, 11:19 ). These heretics
      and schismatics often then form heretical and schismatic
      denominations of their own. Under such circumstances, it is quite
      inconsistent for a believer to be partaking of the Lord's Supper in
      the heretical and schismatic church denominations formed, while
      recognizing the schism in Christ's visible church is due to their
      heresy and errors. For instance, the Baptist error has caused
      schism in Christ's visible church. It is an error against sound
      scriptural principle, which the Westminster Standards and other
      reformed confessions rightly condemn. Baptists should not be
      allowed communion in the reformed churches until they repent of
      their error. So it would be wrong for a reformed believer to
      partake of communion in a Baptist church, even a Calvinistic Baptist
      church. While a Calvinistic Baptist church is a true (not a false)
      church in its being, preaching a gospel by which men can be saved,
      it is not a church in well being. Thus, the esse / bene esse (i.e.,
      being / well being ) distinction among church denominations should
      come into play with respect to communion, even though one may be
      greatly profited by reading and hearing some of the sermons of the
      Calvinistic Baptist minister Charles Spurgeon. As discussed in the
      article at http://www.puritans.net/news/fpcs062804.htm , we should
      distinguish between allowing a Baptist to partake of communion in a
      reformed church (as well as partaking of communion in a Baptist
      church) versus the Reformation practice of allowing a member of the
      reformed Church of the Netherlands to partake of communion in the
      Church of Scotland, or vice versa. Let's give a somewhat
      hypothetical example which is more relevant today. Suppose a
      congregation in Northern Ireland is seeking union with but is not
      yet part of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland (FPCS). And
      suppose one of its communicant members is visiting a FPCS
      congregation during its communion season. And suppose this
      communicant member fulfills all the FPCS criteria of belief and
      practice required of communicant members in the FPCS. Under such
      circumstances, it would be appropriate that such a visitor were
      allowed access to the Lord's Table in the FPCS church. But this is
      very different from allowing a Baptist access to the Lord's Table in
      the FPCS church. The official FPCS policy (which I think is
      correct) is somewhat different from the historic Cameronian and
      Seceder communion policy, but it shares with it great care taken
      with respect to who is admitted to the Lord's Table as well as where
      one should partake.

      - Parnell McCarter
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.