Some of y’all have heard of this most recent attempt by the self-identified “evangelicals” in the PC(USA) to reform the denomination and to stake claim to a “Reformed Heritage”. I recently came into possession of a draft that contains some of the “essential tenets” that the group wishes to be foundational to the future of their project. If you read the whole thing (which you can find here). I could take a while and detail some of the more problematic sections, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so. It is no longer my fight and I think the “reformers” in the PC(USA) would be better off and wiser to recognize that the project they are engaged in cannot be reconciled with the confessional heritage they wish to attach themselves unto. So for the purposes of this blogpost I just want to highlight one error from the list of essentials that really is emblematic of the problems throughout the essentials.
The “NRB” Statement on Baptism
“In the baptism of infants, we confess our confidence in God’s prevenient grace, that a baby who cannot turn to God is nonetheless claimed as a member of the covenant community, a child of God, cleansed by grace and sealed by the spirit.”
At first glance two things come up. 1) The use of the phrase “prevenient grace”. A body which wants to claim a heritage in the Reformed Faith would be wise to not use a Wesleyan and Arminian term that is fraught with difficulties. For a good understanding as to why Reformed believers eschew the term “prevenient grace” see this link. 2) The part of the statement from “that a baby…” on is straight Baptismal Regeneration. See this link as to why this is a problem.
There are few things I have encountered than trying to help my PC(USA) friends understand why even though they like to use the word “Reformed” their theology shows them not to be, at least in any way that any traditional and Confessional Reformed person would understand the term.
