Always Reforming

I consider myself Reformed.  I was baptized as a baby in a PCA church.  I grew up in a Reformed microdenomination that allowed its member churches to subscribe to any of the Reformed confessions (we subscribed to the Three Forms of Unity).  In many ways, whether I like it or not, I still think and act like a Reformed Presbyterian.   Some, however, would seek to deny me that label.  I suspect there are many reasons for this, but paramount among them is that I hold to Paedocommunion (hereafter PC), which, for some reason, is absolutely the worst thing ever to these people.  Some would go so far as to say that PC makes me a heretic, but they all agree that I am certainly not Reformed .   My recent engagement with these opponents of PC has caused me to reflect on what it means to be Reformed and what it means to be a Christian.  This online jousting has dovetailed well with some of my recent study, particularly  An Apology of the Church of England by Jewel.  As we examine individual doctr

Concerning Paedocommunion: I've seen people argue that it is not "Reformed," that is, it is not in line with the historic, Reformed confessions. This point I will grant, though there certainly were some Reformers who held it. This also assumes a mythological idea of a monolithic "Reformed Church" or "Reformed view" on any given matter, but we won't go down that road. I've seen people argue against it exegetically, arguments being mainly drawn from 1 Corinthians 11. I ardently disagree with their interpretations of that passage. In fact, I think 1 Corinthians is one of the strongest defenses of Paedocommunion. Regardless, I can understand their line of argumentation. What I have not seen is an explanation of how Paedocommunion is anything but a valid practice of the historic catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church has literally practiced it forever. We have multiple explicit statements from the early Church that support Paedocommunio

Prayer.  Scripture.  Baptism and the Eucharist.  Fellowship. These are means of grace . What does that mean?  Does that rustle your feathers a little?  Does it sound too Roman Catholic for you?  I assure you that there is nothing magical about this concept of the means of grace.  We do not believe in  ex opere operato .  Nevertheless, God has prescribed specific acts--many of them physical--to which He has attached promises.  The Church has long known these as the means of grace. Let's be clear about one thing-- God can (and does) work however He pleases. He can work directly, miraculously, etc. when He so chooses (see the Conversion of St. Paul). However, He has ordained to use certain, concrete activities to convert and sanctify His people. As Christians, if we wish to grow in holiness and intimacy with God, we are called to utilize these spiritual gardening tools. The primary means of grace have traditionally been identified as the reading/preaching of the Word, the Sacram

Why do you go to church on Sunday?  I would assume there are many reasons, but what is the primary reason that you get up on a cold, snowy Sunday morning and get your butt to church?  Further, why has the Church of Jesus Christ consistently gathered together on Sundays (among other days) for the last 2000 years? Throughout my 34 years of church attendance I would have proffered a variety of answers to that question.  As a child I'm sure I went to church because I had to, to see my cousins (who happened to be my best friends), to get bread and wine (weekly communion for the win), etc.  As my faith matured in adulthood these reasons remained, hopefully deepening, but to them were added concepts like rest and theological training. As I moved into Anglicanism I was struck by the deliberate focus on worship .  Why do Christians gather on Sunday morning?  To worship God!  Are teaching and fellowship important?  Absolutely!  Are they aspects of worship?  Certainly!  Is either the primary

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repent and be baptized...&quo

20 years? Can it be true? Has it really been 20 years Since we lost you? I was just a kid, Sometimes I feel like I still am, I lost you just as I was becoming a man, I think about the scar, Where they cut your body open, Christmas 2003 Left so many hearts broken. 20 years? How can it be? Has it really been  20 years Since you left me? I was just a boy, When those paramedics came through, I've known pain and loss, But I never really knew you, I remember the night,  I heard the shadow was winning, Your pain was over, But ours was just beginning. 20 years? How can it be? Has it really been 20 years Since you were set free? Remember the good times , They always say, But when I think of you,  I think of Flashing lights, And Crippled limbs, Extended hospital stays, And  A cemetery down the road. 20 years? How can it be? Has it really been  20 years Since you left me?