Thoughts on the Baptist-to-Presbyterian Pipeline

Our doctrines are more formed by our context and desires than we realize

I'm not convinced all the baptists who defect to Presbyterian churches are due new convictions regarding infant baptism.

I just don't think most people operate at a level of theological sophistication that's sufficiently able to grasp all the doctrinal issues at stake.

Most people's theology is guided by instinct, comfort, and tradition more than we care to admit.

So why does it seem like all the credo vs. paedo baptist defections are seem to move in the same direction?

I have a theory.

Before I go on, the street-level differences between credo-baptists and paedo-baptists are mostly negligible and intramural, in my opinion. Many of my closest friends and historical heroes were paedo-baptist.

And honestly, it's just not something I'm willing to break fellowship over, given how similar we are in so many other areas. So I share this as "food for thought" as I've observed trends in the church.

Here goes. Doctrine creates culture, which is then taught and applied in a group of people over time.

This applies as follows with the two traditions in question:

* Credo-baptist doctrine stresses covenantal discontinuities, individual conversion, and regenerate church membership, leading to a stronger emphasis on evangelism and missions.

* Paedo-baptist doctrine stresses covenantal continuities, covenant promises to households and children, and the inclusion of children in church membership, leading to a stronger emphasis on the family, multi-generational households, and home education.

In short, credo-baptists tend to emphasize missions, and paedo-baptists tend to emphasize households and family. Obviously, we've got a lot in common, so think of it as more Venn diagram than exclusive circles.

The pipeline of credo-baptist to paedo-baptist defections may be driven by embattled baptist families who are seeking refuge in theological environments that are more culturally oriented towards catechizing children than reaching the lost.

I'm not saying they don't care about reaching the lost, but they are more concerned about their own children being Christian than anyone else, and it takes more time, intentionality, and resources to raise Christian kids now than it did in the Negative World.

If this theory is true, then I imagine the trend will continue. It might even grow as baptist-minded people are realizing they have to go to great lengths to preserve a Christian legacy in their own families, and paedo-baptist churches have a lot of resources to help them.

Therefore, baptist churches that prioritize "reaching the lost" at the expense of equipping families to catechize their own children will seem out of touch with families who place a higher priority on catechizing their own children.

To put it another way, the conditions of the Negative World lead to competing ministry priorities. Credo-baptistic churches may allocate more resources to reaching the lost as Christianity declines in the West. Paedo-baptistic churches may allocate more ministry resources to household discipleship for precisely the same reason.

In short, I suspect that baptistic families that are worried about their children will find common purpose with churches outside their own tradition, and then adjust their doctrine accordingly to soothe the resulting cognitive dissonance.

These tendencies may increase as cultural hostilities towards Christianity increases. Some baptistic churches may adopt ever more desperate measures to reach unbelievers with anything they'll respond to, leading to increasing syncretization of those churches. Consequently, some baptistic families will view this as abandoning their own children to reach someone else's children.

Paedo-baptist churches may likewise abandon all efforts to reach the lost in order to focus on keeping their own spiritual house in order.

Some baptistic families may even go all the way to Catholicism, given Rome's historical bragging rights of being the OG church, and the fact that Catholics were quite pro-family until Pope Francis decided to go for Biden level wokeness in holy vestments. That said, the Catholic Church has produced great minds on matters of sexuality and the family, such as Ryan T. Anderson and J. Budzsciewski, to give two recent examples.

Like I said, it's just a theory, but it fits the data I'm observing.

Even though I'm baptist, being persuaded that only professed believers should be baptized, I am nevertheless convinced that God's plan for the world is built upon the household--first the natural family, and then the household of God (the church).

And given the Negative World hostility of the modern world against Christianity in general, and the Christian family in particular, I believe this is one of the biggest opportunities for baptist pastors and churches to address a real and growing need of modern Christians.

That means greater emphasis on children's catechesis, and starting and supporting home schools, co-ops, and Christian schools.