My letter, sent today to the leadership of my church:

As I continue my study of Covenant Theology, it seems to make more and more sense to think of all the covenants since the "Covenant of Works" (prior to the Fall in the garden) as "different administrations" of one single "Covenant of Grace" from Adam (after the Fall) to the New Covenant.

This was never adequately explained to me during my days as a Presbyterian. It was just, "We baptize babies because we're Presbyterians." Gimme a break, defend the practice from Scripture or else just shut up. Besides, the word Presbyterian is a reference to a church's polity, not it's doctrine. Covenant Baptist Church is "presbyterian" in that regard for goodnessakes.

But now...

I actually think I finally understand the doctrinal/biblical reasons for "covenant baptism" as well as believers' baptism. And it makes so much sense to me now that I can't dismiss it anymore as "some left-over relic of pre-Reformation Romanism." There are important theological reasons for the practice, it seems to me, and I may find myself at odds with the London Baptist Confession. I would choose the Westminster Confession over the LBC.

Is that a problem for me? Would it jeopardize my good-faith membership at Covenant Baptist Church? Even if not, should I consider a church that more fully embraces the doctrinal position my studies have led me to?

Thanks for a prayerful and plain reply,

I ask the same question now of my friends here at the Highway. With thanks in advance for thoughtful replies.