Baptism in The Covenant 2: A case study in how we Communicate

These comments arose from reading the website of a Covenant Church. I know the pastor, though not well, from the period when we served in the same conference. I am not seeking to criticize him, his church or his ministry, but just to explore the way in which we tell people who we are and how we practice our faith.

The website homepage links to its baptism web page with a link inviting the reader to “Get dunked! Click here to register for baptism.” My interest was caught by what sounded, to me, like “professing believer baptism only” language. I wondered: Does this church practice baptism the way its home page suggests? So I followed the link to the baptism page.

Website: “Once a person admits that he or she is a sinner and turns to Christ for salvation, the Bible says the watching world needs to know.”

1. This statement is written exclusively from a professing believer baptism perspective. And if this web page represents the pastor’s perspective, that’s OK, since “Covenant pastors may, and must hold their own convictions concerning baptism”. If it represents this local church’s perspective, and if the church’s Constitution follows the model constitution in affirming that “While the denomination has traditionally practiced the baptism of infants, in conformity with its principle of freedom it has also recognized the practice of believer baptism”, it raises the question of whether the web page reflects the Covenant character of the church.

2. Covenant Pastors commit themselves to administer both infant and professing believer baptism. Would anyone know of this pastor’s commitment from reading this Covenant Church’s web page on baptism? If not, it is a matter of concern. It’s partly a matter of honesty and full disclosure. It would be unwise in the extreme to represent a Covenant Church as though it were a church making room for professing believer baptism only, when any Covenant pastor who serves that church now or in the future must make the commitment referenced above.

Website: “Baptism has always stood as a kind of public test for people who have moved from being a unconvinced into being a believer.”

This statement just caught my attention because, first of all I am not convinced it is accurate, and certainly doesn’t seem to come out of the scriptural text at the top of the page (Acts 8:34-38). The baptism of the Ethiopian was neither public nor a test. I guess my response to the sentence comes in the form of the classic question, “Where is it written?” I took the time to go to Bible Gateway and do a keyword search on “bapt*” in the New Testament. I certainly didn’t see any public test language.

Website: Believers are those who have realized that their sin has separated them from God. They have given up all efforts to reach God through good works or religious activity. They have concluded that Jesus Christ's death on the cross for their sins is the only thing that can bridge the gap between them and God. A believer is someone who has decided to trust Christ alone for his or her salvation.

While I’ve included this whole paragraph, it was really the last sentence that caught my attention. I thought that a believer is someone who trusts Christ alone for his or her salvation. By grace we are saved through faith, Ephesians tells us – not through any decision or choice we make. Maybe it’s splitting hairs, and I’ll allow that charge to be made. But I think it is a distinction with a difference. How many people allow a decision to function as a good work or religious activity in their spiritual life? “Of course I’m saved – I went forward (or I decided, or I chose, or I prayed the prayer)?” Speaking personally, I have done all those things, and as a personal evangelism trainer and associate for The Covenant since 1991 I have taught on this topic many times. We are not secure in Christ because of what we have done. We are secure because of the grace He has given us to trust in what He has done. Isn’t that right? And if it is, shouldn’t we be careful to make sure our communication carries that message?

In the section of the page headed “Biblical Passages”, the author further articulates a perspective on baptism following faith – i.e., professing believer baptism. I’m not going to challenge the content there from a theological perspective, since The Covenant does make room for both baptismal positions.

I love the fact that, as the policy states, “The Covenant chooses to respect the biblical positions of both infant and believer baptism equally”. I deeply respect the Statement’s observation that “The new birth created a strong bond among believers that would not be broken by differences over baptism. The result was that the doctrine of the church took priority over the theology of the sacraments.” Recognizing that “infant and believer baptism are in fact mutually exclusive at critical points of theology and practice”, I am grateful to every Covenant pastor who submits to The Covenant’s policy “for the unity of the church…acting out of respect for the convictions of the people they serve”. I believe that is a perspective unique among church bodies (though certainly not exclusive to The Covenant) and that rather than letting it be hidden by its absence in a church’s public communication, it should be highlighted and honored. It’s one of the features that makes The Covenant such a wonderful body in which to do ministry.