Cross my heart and hope to live

 WCF 10.3  Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit,(1) who works when, and where, and how He pleases.(2) So also are all other elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.(3)

(1)Luke 18:15,16; Acts 2:38,39; John 3:3,5; 1 John 5:12; Rom. 8:9.

(2)John 3:8.

(3)1 John 5:12; Acts 4:12.

Here is the great Reformed faux pas.  The PCA believes that all children born to parents who profess the true religion are not Christians, that is, they are not bona fide members of the Church; they are not children of God; they are not yet believers. They are a part of the visible church but not the invisible.  They belong to the sphere of Christian influence but have not yet been influenced. 

The visible church is the church universally known and seen in each of its specific physical locations.  Those who belong to this sphere of influence belong only by profession of faith (if an adult) and if said adult(s) have children, those children are members of this echelon but not of the upper echelon, namely, the invisible church.  The invisible church is that stratum of those who have professed the true religion truly.  These privileged individuals are those whom God has chosen for final salvation.  Only those whom God himself has elected to save finally.  Those who are only and remain only in the visible realm have no one to blame but their own recalcitrant hearts.  They entered into the visible church by profession only (and a false one at that), not by God’s election and their profession is deemed to be false.  The (non) believer who belongs to the visible church does not truly belong to the invisible church because of his not being eternally elected. 

What distinguishes the “haves” from the “have-nots” is purely the eternal pleasure of God to save for himself a remnant of humanity from the slough of despond.  It is not as though the false professor failed to be earnest in his profession (else his faith would be works) or even that the false professor’s sins caused him to lose his salvation, it is because he was not a part of that numbered elect before the foundation of the world. 

What is interesting with what the WCF does here is to assume any salvation for the infants of believers at all apart from faith.  How does that not mess up the ordo salutis?  Really.  Look up any of those “proof” texts and evaluate them.  How is that different than what the FV is arguing?  All we are saying is that rather than an weak “maybe” we say that the promises are yes and amen.  The presupposition to this paragraph is that not all infants are elect.  The opposing presupposition is that they are elect.  The question is, which has more scriptural warrant?

Will the true covenant member please raise your hand. No, not you Jr. You’re not 18 yet.

The question at hand is, “How can it be maintained that being in covenant is not the same as belonging to the church?”  This is one of the linchpins.  What the FV espouses about members of the covenant is what the PCA says about church members.  What it comes down to is the PCA ends up sounding Baptist, “They don’t belong to the covenant!  They aren’t in the covenant! They’re not truly in the covenant.”  But they are in the church.  What ever that might mean.

Is there truly a difference between being in the church objectively and being in the covenant objectively?  Because the Baptists say that children of believers must enter into the covenant by faith (which is what we say, too, there’s just a mix up in the ordo salutis).  But then you have someone who comes in by faith and then falls away.  “Well, they weren’t really in the covenant!  He never really bel..”  And there’s what, 2 proof texts for that?  WOW!!You ask me the question, “Do you believe that anyone who is decretally elect can fall away?”  No.  But then you have someone in the church who professes faith and is baptised and then falls away.  I say (at least) the same thing you do, “he didn’t persevere; he didn’t maintain faith”.  But what is more is I say there was a true covenant relationship between the apostate and God.  This person had true obligations to the covenant.  He must believe; he must persevere in faith. Just like you.