Yarnell & Ascol on CommunionA QUESTION ABOUT BAPTISTS AND
PEDOBAPTISTS ON COMMUNION
We have several times indicated on this blog the infatuation by the Flounders, founded by Ernest Reisinger and now headed by Tom Ascol, with the Pedobaptist "Reformed" Hybrid Calvinist Presbyterians who have forsaken the Westminster Confession of Faith on "Effectual Calling."
Now, Dr. Malcolm Yarnell has collared Flounders' Frontman, Tom Ascol, with a question in regard to the Lord's Supper, or Communion.
Are the Flounders also so attuned with the Pedobaptist Hybrids to the extent that they would invite them to commune at the Lord's Supper?
If Ascol has yet made a clear and distinct reply to Yarnell, I have somehow failed to see it on the Flounders' blog where Yarnell and Ascol have been exchanging comments.
The following seems to summarize what I have seen thus far on the Flounders' blog:
Yarnell to Ascol: Does your church have in its belief and/or practice the offering of communion to a Presbyterian? -- 9:27 AM, November 27, 2008
Ascol to Yarnell: Those whose profession of regenerate church membership is only theoretical and who yet set themselves up as defenders of Baptist distinctives have forsaken any moral authority to be taken seriously. -- 10:01 AM, November 27, 2008
It seems that Ascol does not think he should take Yarnell's question "seriously."
When I read Ascol's comment, I wondered if perhaps his own words appropriately might be applied to Ascol who has been so outspoken on "regenerate church membership"?
Would he offer communion to the "unregenerate," or does he agree with the Pedobaptists on "the regeneration of covenant children in infancy?"
If Ascol or any other Baptist invites a faithful Presbyterian of the modern "Reformed" category to the Lord's Supper, here is what is apparently endorsed:
1. The faithful Presbyterian holds that he (or she) was "regenerated" in infancy, either before physical birth, or shortly after birth, or at the time of infant baptism, or shortly after infant baptism.
2. The faithful Presbyterian, consequently, holds that "regeneration" takes place before the infant believes on Jesus Christ as Saviour.
3. The faithful Presbyterian was received into church membership in infancy, following his baptism.
4. The faithful Presbyterian holds that his membership in the Presbyterian church predates any confession of faith in Christ.
Now, these are matters which are altogether apart from any differences Baptists might have in regard to the "mode of baptism" -- whether by sprinkling, pouring, or immersion. This issue here is simply "regeneration."
If the Presbyterian does not hold to the specifications I have cited above, then he is not faithful to the doctrine and practice of his church.
If he does hold to them, then for a Baptist to invite this Presbyterian to the Lord's Supper apparently constitutes a tacit endorsement of infant regeneration and infant church membership.
If Ascol insists on a very tight ship on "regenerate church membership," would it be consistent to tacitly endorse the "Reformed" heresies of infant "regeneration" and "church membership" by inviting them to communion?