We Are Closer to Rome than We Think!

The more I ponder the scriptures relating to baptism and the Lord's Table, and the more I study these practices in the church, the more sorrow fills my heart.  We are guilty of denying access in areas where we are not called or qualified to deny.  I have spent over 10 years studying church history and, specifically, Roman Catholicism.  What I see happening in the reformed churches is a subtle return to Rome.  Well, in all honesty, this is not a problem inherent in the modern reformed church, this is a problem that has plagued the church from the very beginning.

I cannot find warrant in scripture for delaying admittance to the Lord's Table until a person is a member of a local church in good standing.  I find no warrant in scripture for delaying baptism until a person has attended a new member class and desires membership.  Where do we come up with these things?

I know the answer to that question.  Do you?

Read the words of Spurgeon and ask yourself, "Do I agree with this statement?"

It does not appear from the Scriptures to have been an act peculiar to preachers; in fact, at least one of them, and he by no means the least, was not sent to baptize, but to preach the gospel. A vigorous Christian member of the church is far more in his place in the baptismal waters than his ailing, consumptive, or rheumatic pastor. Any objection urged against this assertion is another unconscious leaning to tradition, if not a relic of superstition.

How many of you think that baptism should be administered only by an ordained pastor or elder?  I am willing to say that most of you think that way, including most of the reformed pastors or elders I know.  Now---ask yourself why you hold to that point of view.  Show me scripture to back up your convictions.