Last night I had the privilege to enjoy a few beverages with some friends who wanted to discuss the Presbyterian and Reformed view of baptism. In particular, they wanted to know where the heck I could find in the Bible the idea of sprinkling water on some babies and calling such the practice of baptism!
We had a fun and engaging discussion. I think there were both laughs and raised eyebrows, especially when I noted that the Jews who became Christian converts on the day of Pentecost by virtue of their believing and being baptized had excommunicated their children from God’s covenant. (That must have been a fun first church discipline case for the Apostles!)
In discussing various views of baptism, my friends asked me to distinguish how a confessional Baptist, a confessional Presbyterian, and a strange Federal Vision-Reformed person might think about the doctrine of the church and who is a part of the church.
Since one of these gentlemen is a philosophy buff I gave him the following parallel.
The sacerdotalism Reformed type would have the visible church swallow the invisible church, thus promoting a nominalist ecclesiology.
The confessional Baptist type would have the invisible church swallow the visible church, thus promoting an idealist ecclesiology.
The confessional Presbyterian type (including yours truly) would affirm and distinguish the visible church and invisible church, affirming a reality to both forms of the church as taught by Scripture. This promotes a realist ecclesiology.
So, my Federal Vision revisionist friends are Humean. My Baptist friends are Kantian. And the Presbyterians are Aristotelian or Thomistic. (#donttellthevantilians)
Clear as mud? Good.