September 4, 2017 Show with Jeffrey Waddington on “Is Roman Catholic Baptism Christian Baptism?”

Live from the historic parsonage of 19th century gospel minister George Norcross in downtown Carlisle, Pennsylvania, it's Iron Sharpens Iron, a radio platform on which pastors, Christian scholars and theologians address the burning issues facing the church and the world today.

Proverbs 27 verse 17 tells us iron sharpens iron so one man sharpens another. Matthew Henry said that in this passage, quote, we are cautioned to take heed whom we converse with and directed to have in view in conversation to make one another wiser and better.

It is our hope that this goal will be accomplished over the next hour and we hope to hear from you, the listener, with your own questions. Now here's our host.

Jeffrey Waddington’s Background and Call to Presbyterian Ministry

Chris Arns. Good afternoon Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Lake City, Florida and the rest of humanity living on the planet earth who are listening via live streaming at ironsharpensironradio .com. This is Chris Arns and your host of Iron Sharpens Iron Radio, wishing you all a happy Monday on this Labor Day of 2017, September 4th to be precise, and it is my honor and privilege to have on the program someone who has been a co-host on Iron Sharpens Iron Radio, but this is his first time as a guest on our program.

I'm speaking of Jeffrey C. Waddington who is the stated supply at Knox Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Lansdowne, and he's also a board member of Reformed Forum. Today we're going to be addressing a very controversial theme, something that divides in particular Presbyterians and other Pato Baptists, and this is the subject, is Roman Catholic baptism.

Christian baptism? And why have Presbyterians today largely dismissed J. H. Thornwell and the 1845 General Assembly of the American Presbyterian Church? And it's my honor and privilege to welcome you back, but for the first time as a guest, Pastor Jeffrey C. Waddington.

Oh it's my privilege to be here with you Chris. And in studio with me is my co-host the Reverend Buzz Taylor. Still co-hosting, here I am. And let me get a distinct definition of what a stated supply is, Jeff.

You corrected me moments before the program went on the air and you said that you're not a pastor, you're a stated supply, and those are titles foreign to us Reformed Baptists.

It's simply the difference is I have not been given a call to be the pastor, and the call hasn't been put before the Presbytery, and the Presbytery hasn't weighed the pros and cons and then approved or disapproved and placed it in my hand and then installed me.

In every other sense, I do all the things that a pastor does. I preach twice on Sunday, I do visitation, counseling, the whole nine yards. And is it improper for me to call you.

Pastor, Jeff? No. Okay. And well, like I typically do with first-time guests on Iron Sherpa and Zion Radio, if you could let our listeners know something about the religion of your youth, the religious atmosphere in your home, and how providentially the Lord.

Drew you to himself and saved you. Well, I was born into a Christian home in the Wesleyan Arminian tradition. My parents were Salvation Army officers, so I grew up in the Salvation Army. Yeah, I remember you telling me that.

And then I came to faith in Christ myself when I was 18. God was gracious in dealing with me as he always is with all of us. But that was when the light went on. I never, even as a Wesleyan, I never took credit for my coming to faith in Christ because, and as I look back now, 30-some years later, it's certainly not the case that I sat down one day and decided, I think I'll be a Christian today.

It slowly dawned on me beginning in my senior year of high school, but then it took about a year and a half until I came to faith in Christ on Good Friday of 1983. Remember, if I date my conversion, that's when I look, at the time where I said, okay, Lord, I turn to you in faith.

That's approximately the time, the year that I came to Christ myself. It was probably more like 1984 or, but it was not, during 1983 was definitely when a drawing process was going on.

So I then finished my second year of college and then trained as a Salvation Army officer myself for two years in Suffern, New York, which I think you're familiar with. That neck of the woods.

Yeah, I can remember when I used to take a path train from Hoboken, New Jersey, or should I say from New York City to Hoboken, New Jersey, when I worked for WMCA Christian Radio, there was a train going to Suffern and I never got on that train, but I just remember seeing that.

Sign every week. It's on the New York side, Mahwah is on the Jersey side. They're literally right on the line, Bergen County. And so then I served for eight years as a pastor in the Salvation Army. I got married during that time in 1990, so my wife and I have been married for 27 years.

We're in our 28th year now. And then in 1994, we left the Salvation Army.

Did you leave voluntarily or were you court-martialed?

Oh, funny guy! No, voluntarily, so that I could go back to school. Okay, funny guy. And then so in 94, yeah, I think it was in late fall of 94, a friend of mine invited me to the local PCA church in Ithaca, New York.

And my wife and I attended and we were impressed with the and the very biblical and the fellowship was warm. So it was one of that rare combination, I suppose, of both solid doctrine and warm fellowship.

And then in 95, I was baptized in the same service along with my eldest daughter, because in the Salvation Army, they don't practice the sacraments, the ordinances. And so I was baptized and welcomed into the membership of the church in March of 95.

And then the following year, about a year later, we moved to Philadelphia for me to begin my studies at Westminster Seminary.

Well, praise God. And it's been a true joy and privilege to get to know you and to have a...

And for me to get to know you, too.

And to have a friendship form, you might want to raise your microphone a little bit, because it's rubbing against your clothing every time.

I hear that.

Those are very sensitive mics.

And there we go. That's better.

Roman Catholic Baptism and the Presbyterian Divide

And today, as I said, we are discussing is Roman Catholic baptism, Christian baptism, and why have Presbyterians today largely dismissed J. H. Thornwell and the 1845 General Assembly of the American Presbyterian Church.

Before I even go into your own experience and the journey that you were on that led you to your current theological position on this, and just to let our listeners know up front, Pastor Jeff does not believe that Roman Catholic baptism is valid Christian baptism.

And therefore, if a Roman Catholic were to come to Christ and seek membership at the Knox Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Lansdowne, Pennsylvania, he would require that they be baptized if the only baptism they received was by the Roman Catholic Church.

In fact, I'm a minority here today. We got two Presbyterians and a Reformed Baptist. Both Reverend Buzz Taylor and my guest Jeffrey Waddington are both Presbyterians and both ordained in the ministry.

And of course, Reformed Baptists only see as valid Christian baptism the immersion and water of a repentant believer in Christ Jesus. Some mistakenly say that we believe in exclusive adult baptism, but that's not true because most Reformed Baptist churches do baptize children if they make a credible profession of repentance and faith.

But today, I am somewhat removing my Reformed Baptist hat from the discussion today, because this is really a Pato Baptist divide, because all Reformed Baptists would reject a Roman Catholic baptism. In fact, they would, unless there's a Reformed Baptist church I don't know of, that would accept even a Roman Catholic baptism if it were done to a believer by immersion, because they do occur if you have somebody who's never been baptized in any denomination who becomes Roman Catholic.

For instance, if a Jewish person or a Muslim or an atheist or somebody who has never been baptized becomes a Roman Catholic, they typically will sprinkle you or pour water on you. But there are occasions where, if it's requested, a person has been immersed in the Roman Catholic baptism.

But Reformed Baptists would typically reject any Roman Catholic baptism, whether it's the baptism of an infant or an adult. But in the Presbyterian and other Reformed Pato Baptist traditions, there is a divide over this.

Some Presbyterians, in fact, I would say most Presbyterians and Pato Baptists accept a Roman Catholic's baptism as valid and therefore do not re-baptize, quote, quote, that individual. And there are some who would even go as far as to say that it's sinful to baptize a Catholic again, because they would say they were already baptized, and that to repeat this ordinance would be sin.

But there are others, like my guest today, who actually reject a Roman Catholic baptism. And we're going to get into his own reasons momentarily, but I would like to take a moment to read to our listeners what is said and performed at a Roman Catholic baptism.

I would like to read a portion. This is not the entirety of the typical liturgy. There are some variations in the Roman Catholic Church on the liturgy regarding baptism, but they are not very significant, the differences.

They are basically the same. And just so our listeners understand that we're not just talking about a Roman Catholic priest who sprinkles water or pours water on the head of an infant in the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

If it were only that, the Pato Baptists would probably have no division at all over this rite of baptism or this sacrament. But there's a lot more going on, and I'm going to read to you the abbreviated liturgy for the sake of time here.

What happens at a Roman Catholic baptism? Well, first, the celebrant speaks to the parents in these or similar words. You have asked to have your child baptized. In doing so, you are accepting the responsibility of training him or her in the practice of the faith, which would mean the Roman Catholic Church, of course.

It will be your duty to bring him or her up to keep God's commandments as Christ taught us by loving God and our neighbor. The celebrant, and this would mean the priest or the one performing the baptism, next invites all present to invoke the saints.

Holy Mary, Mother of God, and then everyone repeats, pray for us. Saint John the Baptist, and then everyone repeats, pray for us. Saint Joseph, then everyone repeats, pray for us. Saint Peter and Saint Paul, and then all repeat, pray for us.

The names of other saints may be added, especially the patrons of the child to be baptized and of the church or locality. After the prayer of exorcism, the celebrant continues, we anoint you with the oil of salvation in the name of Christ our Savior.

May he strengthen you with his power who lives and reigns forever and ever. He anoints the child on the breast with the oil of catechumens. When they come to the front, the celebrant briefly reminds the congregation of the wonderful work of God whose plan it is to sanctify man, body, and soul through water.

He may use these or similar words. My dear brothers and sisters, God uses the sacrament of water to give his divine life to those who believe in him. Let us turn to him and ask him to pour his gift of life from this font on this child as this child he has chosen.

Then turning to the font, he says the following blessing. Father, look now with love upon your church and unseal for her the fountain of baptism. By the power of the spirit, give to the water of this font the grace of your son.

You created man in your own likeness. Cleanse him from sin in a new birth to innocence by water and the spirit. The celebrant touches the water with his right hand and continues. We ask you, Father, with your son to send the Holy Spirit upon the water of this font.

May all who are buried with Christ in the death of baptism rise also with him to newness of life. We ask this through Christ our Lord. The celebrant invites the family to the font and questions the parents and godparents.

Is it your will that the name of the child should be baptized in the faith of the church, Roman Catholic Church, of course, which we have all professed with you? And the parents and the godparents say it is.

The celebrant baptizes the child. Then the celebrant says, God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ has freed you from sin, given you a new birth by water and the Holy Spirit, and welcomed you into his holy people.

He now anoints you with the chrism of salvation. As Christ has anointed priest, excuse me, as Christ was anointed priest, prophet, and king, so may you live always as a member of his body, sharing everlasting life.

The celebrant then says the name of the child. You have become a new creation and have clothed yourself in Christ. The celebrant stands in front of the altar and addresses the parents, godparents, and the whole assembly in these or similar words.

Dearly beloved, this child has been reborn in baptism. He or she is now called the child of God, for so indeed he or she is. In confirmation, he or she will receive the fullness of God's spirit. In holy communion, he or she will share the banquet of Christ's sacrifice, calling God his or her father in the midst of the church.

Well, there you have the majority of what is said and done at your typical Roman Catholic baptism. And obviously, as I had stated earlier, this involves much more than just using water as the element in the ordinance or sacrament in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

There are prayers evoking the saints to bless this ceremony and other things going on that would be totally foreign to the beliefs and practices of confessional, conservative Presbyterians and other Reformed and Calvinistic paedo-baptists.

So now we will return to your own experience, Pastor Jeff, as to what you believed about baptism when you first left the Salvation Army, which does not conduct baptisms at all. They don't conduct baptism or the Lord's Supper, believing that those, I believe, were done away with after the apostolic era.

Am I right?

Well, for the first 20 years of the Salvation Army's existence, I do believe they did practice both baptism and the Lord's Supper, but there was a Quaker influence in there in the early years. And due to the Quaker influence, the practice of the ordinances fell by the wayside.

Right. So when you could become a Christian, you became a Christian within Presbyterianism, correct? Well, I'm sorry, let me take that back. You were perhaps a Christian in the Salvation Army, but when you went on a journey of theology and searching the scriptures, the first church after your Salvation Army experience was a Presbyterian, correct?

Yes.

And so what were your initial views regarding baptism?

Well, I mean, I had seen that, of course, baptism was commanded in the New Testament, typically in the Salvation Army. That would involve, in every instance, that would be referring to spirit baptism, rather than the rite of water baptism.

So it was looking past the sign to the thing signified in every instance. So I very quickly settled into a Presbyterian or Reformed view of things and came to Westminster. And well, now probably five or six years, I had gone through the Master of Divinity program and was actually in the PhD program at Westminster and was asked to teach on the sacraments in a couple of instances for some courses that I was a teaching assistant for.

And I always thought God had a sense of humor that I would be the one teaching on the sacraments at Westminster Theological Seminary, given my background. And so it was in preparation for that, more even than having taken the coursework in the Master of Divinity program and in that instance, being given a short version of the debate that we'll talk about momentarily.

I had a biblical section, and then I had a historical development section, and then a systematic. That was the way I presented the material on the baptism in the Lord's Supper. And in the historical section, I had to deal with the debate between Charles Hodge of Princeton Seminary in New Jersey and James Henley Thornwell of Columbia Theological Seminary in South Carolina that occurred in the 1840s.

Thornwell, the hero of Southern Presbyterianism, went up against Hodge, the hero of Northern Presbyterianism. And that debate has yielded, in the present day, at least in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and in the Presbyterian Church in America, the local session, that is, board of elders in a local congregation, has the right to either accept or reject Roman Catholic baptism.

So one could argue that basically, Hodge and Thornwell are interpreted as having reached a draw.

Hodge, Thornwell, and the Historical Debate over Valid Baptism

Well, I don't know what your experience is being a Presbyterian yourself and being a Presbyterian minister, but in my experience, having worked in Christian radio for 30 years approximately and having met many different Pato Baptists and Presbyterians of all stripes, the majority that I have personally met, because I typically try to remember to ask this question about baptism because it's one that fascinates me, the majority of Presbyterians that I know personally, especially in the ministry, would accept Roman Catholic baptism as valid.

Therefore, when a convert from Rome approaches them to join their congregation, there is no baptism performed. And you are amongst a rare handful that I have met personally that oppose the acceptance of Catholic baptism.

In other words, you reject Catholic baptism. In fact, we have a mutual friend in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church out in California, Pastor B .J. Gorel. I want to give him a shout out to him and his elders and his wife, Nancy, and everyone over there at the Westminster Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Westminster, California.

He agrees with you on this. And there is a few other, very few others that I have met. How about your experience with other Presbyterian and Pato Baptist ministers, especially?

Interestingly enough, I've not done a scientific survey, but the interaction that I've had would be in agreement with what you've said, that for the most part, it's assumed that Hodge won the debate, and therefore they just go forward with the acceptance of Roman Catholic.

Baptism. The allowance for the session to make that decision one way or the other is, I believe, in the PCA in its book of church order. So it's specified as such. In the OPC, it is not in the book of church order.

The Presbytery of New Jersey, about five days after I was born, so I had nothing to do with this, in 1960, December of 1964, issued a statement saying that Roman Catholic baptism was not Christian or not valid.

However, that never was dealt with, as far as I could tell, in my looking over the minutes of the General Assemblies from the beginning until now. It's never, a ruling has never been, the position has never been staked out by a General Assembly on this issue.

So where it is specified in the PCA, it is not specified, per se, in the OPC, but the practice is pretty much the same. The local session is allowed to determine whether to accept Roman Catholic baptism as Christian or valid or is not.

In fact, I forgot to mention another Orthodox Presbyterian who I just spoke with very recently who agrees with you, who also rejects Roman Catholic baptism as being invalid baptism, is Pastor Roger Wagner of the Bayview Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Chula Vista, California, who also, along with Pastor B .J. Gorel, wanted to participate on the phone in this conversation today, but there was a scheduled conflict with both of them.

They are both very enthusiastic about your interview today.

Well, hopefully we'll give them good reason to be enthusiastic about this.

Scheduled conflict is probably grilling hot dogs or something since it is Labor Day.

That's right. In fact, I know that's one of the scheduled conflicts because B .J. Gorel is actually, I believe, in upstate New York or something. I think he might even be in Buffalo where you're from, but I forget now.

He's somewhere at a family gathering for the holidays. But you had something to say, Pastor.

Right.

Should I say Reverend Buzz?

I've been called Reverend Buzzy before and it's somehow just, I don't know. But, of course, when we talk about baptism, Catholic baptism, and the Reformed Presbyterian Churches, we really can't round out the whole discussion without mentioning that some of the reason for the belief in allowing the Roman Catholic baptism is because of the Westminster Confession of the Faith itself.

Now, I don't have the exact wording in front of me and I, you know, perish the thought that I don't have it memorized verbatim, but it does say in there that the baptism is actually the Lord's baptism and therefore it is not dependent on the piety or whatever the character, anything of the person that is actually performing it, because it doesn't belong to that person.

It belongs to Christ. It's his baptism. That's, you know, what they have.

And as a Reformed Baptist, if I were to find out, no offense to Mike Gadosh, if he's listening, who baptized me, but if I were to find out that the man who baptized me was a serial killer, that would not affect my baptism at all.

So I agree with the confessional statement on that, but this is beyond that because of the other things going on in the ceremony. And on top of that, when a person is baptized by a Roman Catholic priest, they're being baptized into the Roman Catholic faith, which most Reformed and Calvinist people view as apostate at one level or another.

I know that there are different degrees of separation that Calvinists and Reformed churches and denominations have in regard to Rome, but it is certainly agreed upon that the Church of Rome has a different gospel than we do.

And even they, historically and dogmatically, have made that clear at the Council of Trent. So do you have anything further to add about the Westminster Confession, Pastor Jeff?

Well, what Buzz mentions is absolutely correct, and that can be traced back to the Donatist controversy in the life of St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. That position of saying that the baptism is not nullified by the character of the man performing the rite.

Of course, that's not the issue that's actually being discussed here directly. It might seem that that's what's going on, but it's actually not. We're actually talking about the official teaching and practice of the Roman Catholic Church, and the bearing that has on whether Roman Catholic baptism is valid.

Not the character of the man doing the celebrant, to use the language that you used earlier.

Why Roman Catholic Baptism Is Not Christian Baptism

Right, we're going to our first break right now, if anybody would like to join us with a question of your own. Our email address is chrisarnsen at gmail .com. C-H-R-I-S-A-R-N-Z-E-N at gmail .com.

Please give us at least your first name, your city and state, and your country of residence if you live outside of the USA. And please only remain anonymous if it's about a personal and private matter.

Let's suppose you disagree with your own pastor on this, and you don't want to identify yourself. I understand that. Perhaps you disagree with your own spouse or something. We will grant your request to remain anonymous, but if it's not about a personal or private issue, please give us at least your first name, your city and state, and your country of residence if you live outside of the good old USA.

Don't go away. God willing, we are going to be right back after these messages with Pastor Jeffrey C. Waddington in our discussion on Roman Catholic baptism.

Hi, I'm Buzz Taylor, frequent co-host with Chris Arnzen on Iron Sharpens Iron Radio. I would like to introduce you to my good friends Todd and Patti Jennings at CVBBS, which stands for Cumberland Valley Bible Book Service.

Todd and Patti specialize in supplying Reformed and Puritan books and Bibles at discount prices that make them affordable to everyone. Since 1987, the family-owned and operated book service has sought to bring you the best available Christian books and Bibles at the best possible prices.

Unlike other book sites, they make no effort to provide every book that is available because, frankly, much of what is being printed is not worth your time. That means you can get to the good stuff faster.

It also means that you don't have to worry about being assaulted by the pornographic, heretical and otherwise faith-insulting material promoted by the secular book vendors. Their website is CVBBS .com.

Browse the pages at ease, shop at your leisure, and purchase with confidence as Todd and Patti work in service to you, the Church, and to Christ. That's Cumberland Valley Bible Book Service at CVBBS .com.

That's CVBBS .com. Let Todd and Patti know that you heard about them on Iron Sharpens Iron Radio.

Hi, I'm Pastor Bill Shishko inviting you to tune in to A Visit to the Pastors Study every Saturday from 12 noon to 1 pm Eastern Time on WLIE Radio, www .wlie540am .com. We bring biblically faithful pastoral ministry to you, and we invite you to visit the Pastors Study by calling in with your questions.

Our time will be lively, useful, and I assure you, never dull. Join us this Saturday at 12 noon Eastern Time for a visit to the Pastors Study, because everyone needs a pastor.

In other words, they'd like to change the battery industry for good by providing an extensive inventory of top-of-the-line batteries that are uniformly new, dependable, and affordable. Ordering from BatteryDepot .com ensures you'll always get fresh, out-of-the-box batteries you can count on to work properly at competitive prices.

Whether you need batteries for cordless phones, cell phones, radios, PCs, laptops, tablets, baby monitors, hearing aids, smoke detectors, credit card readers, digital cameras, electronic cigarettes, GPSs, MP3 players, watches, or nearly anything else you own that needs batteries, go to BatteryDepot .com.

Next day shipping available. All products protected by 30-day guarantees and 6-month warranties. Call 866 -403 -3768. That's 866 -403 -3768. Or go to BatteryDepot .com. That's BatteryDepot .com.

Paul wrote to the church at Galatia, For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ. Hi, I'm Mark Lukens, pastor of Providence Baptist Church.

We are a Reformed Baptist Church, and we hold to the London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689. We are in Norfolk, Massachusetts. We strive to reflect Paul's mindset to be much more concerned with how God views what we say and what we do, than how men view these things.

That's not the best recipe for popularity, but since that wasn't the Apostle's priority, it must not be ours either. We believe, by God's grace, that we are called to demonstrate love and compassion to our fellow man, and to be vessels of Christ's mercy to a lost and hurting community around us, and to build up the body of Christ in truth and love.

If you live near Norfolk, Massachusetts, or plan to visit our area, please come and join us for worship and fellowship. You can call us at 508 -528 -5750. That's 508 -528 -5750. Or go to our website to email us, listen to past sermons, worship songs, or watch our TV program entitled, Resting in Grace.

You can find us at providencebaptistchurchma .org. That's providencebaptistchurchma .org, or even on sermonaudio .com. Providence Baptist Church is delighted to sponsor Iron Sharpens Iron Radio.

Welcome back. This is Chris Arns, and if you just tuned into our program today on Iron Sharpens Iron Radio, we are discussing, Is Roman Catholic Baptism Christian Baptism? And why have Presbyterians today largely dismissed J .H. Thornwell and the 1845 General Assembly of the American Presbyterian Church?

If you'd like to join us on the air with a question of your own, our email address is chrisarnsen at gmail .com. C-H-R-I-S-A-R-N-Z-E-N at gmail .com. And please give us at least your first name, city and state, and country of residence if you live outside of the USA.

We've already stole or stolen, I should say, some of the thunder of a question or series of questions by one of our listeners in Scottsville, Kentucky. Susan from Scottsville, Kentucky. But I'll read her question now before we steal any more of her thunder and have you perhaps elaborate on anything you've already said.

Susan says, Regarding the Presbyterian disregard for the Roman Catholic Baptism and the 1845 Assembly, if I am correct, the current status is that the Roman Catholic Baptism is generally acceptable. I was wondering is, I was wondering, I think she meant to say if, that's the case because modern Presbyterians have been studying Hodge and see that his defense of the Roman rite makes sense.

Or was the decision back in 1845 influenced by the evangelicalism of that time, which was entrenched in the Second Great Awakening and the Believers' Baptism? And that's Susan in Scottsville, Kentucky.

Any comment on that?

That's a good question. I don't know. It would be worth looking at.

You're talking about the last thing she said about the Second Great Awakening?

Why the, I mean, I could hazard a guess as to why Thornwell is, well, first of all, I don't know. We haven't done a scientific survey to know, like to survey every session in the PCA and say the OPC. Okay, do you, for a fact, accept or reject Roman Catholic Baptism?

Then I could talk more authoritatively on that particular aspect. But for the sake of argument, if we say that Hodge has prevailed, that could be traced to many things. One could be that at one point, the only conservative Bible-believing Reformed or Presbyterian seminary was Westminster in Philadelphia at one point.

That's no longer the case whatsoever in the early 1900s. Now, Columbia Seminary, I understand, in the South, in South Carolina, still exists as far as I know. But it moved from Columbia to the Atlanta, Georgia area many years ago.

And it is aligned with the PCUSA. So it remained a mainline Southern Presbyterian school. So we might not be surprised if Columbia didn't maintain the hard line that, I'll call it the hard line that Thornwell advocates.

The reason, okay, so the question is to why, is there a second Great Awakening influence? That's a good question. That would not have any bearing on Hodge, I don't think. In terms of his position. The Hodge does reveal why he accepts Roman Catholic baptism toward the end of his initial article, which was a response to the 1845 General Assembly decision of the Presbyterian Church Old School.

Okay, now, without going into a whole history of the Presbyterian tradition in the United States. But just to give general outlines. In the 1836 -37, the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America split into Old School and New School.

And it's the Princeton Seminary sided with the Old School. I would see myself as an Old School Presbyterian for the most part. And it's that, this debate was within the Old School Presbyterian tradition prior to the Civil War and the split in the Old School between the North and the South.

So in 1845, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church Old School announced that, or determined that Roman Catholic baptism was invalid. That is, it was not a legitimate Christian baptism. Christian form of baptism.

The vote was like 160-something to, Hodge actually gives the vote tally in his 169 to 8 and to 6 non-liquet. So that's quite an overwhelming majority voted against the validity of Roman Catholic baptism.

And voting against Hodge's opinion.

Correct.

Hodge wrote an article called The Validity of Romish Baptism that appeared in the Princeton Review in July of 1845, written, obviously, after the General Assembly, which typically met in May or June. And so he's responding in disagreement with that decision of the General Assembly.

Thornwell, who is a major Southern Presbyterian theologian, wrote a response to the article that Hodge had written, and he published that one in The Watchman and Observer in 1846. Now, it's helpful to understand, to get the context, that Thornwell and Hodge, being major representatives of their wings of the Old School Presbyterian Church, debated about many issues.

This is one. They were at loggerheads about the use of boards and committees. In other words, they were at loggerheads about whether it was legitimate for the Presbyterian Church to rely upon, say, a non-denominational missions board to vet and send Presbyterian missionaries.

Hodge, I believe, thought it was okay, and Thornwell said, no, that's the job of the Church. The Presbytery ought to be doing that. And they debated other topics as well. So this is one among several where they disagreed with one another.

They were two of the big names in terms of theologians in the Presbyterian Church prior to the Civil War.

Now, it has been argued that the reason why the acceptance of Roman Catholic baptism is more dominant today is just because of the rise of the ecumenical movement between Protestants and Roman Catholics, an ecumenism that was unheard of in the 19th century and earlier to the degree that it exists today.

Because as you know, Pastor Jeff, there was a time where the modern ecumenical movement really only existed in any kind of significant form, was in liberalism. And you had liberal Protestants, ironically, seeking ecumenical relationships with Roman Catholics, even though dogmatically that Church condemns those liberal Protestants.

But today, you have a lot more conservative churches, denominations, fellowships, brotherhoods, and individuals having ecumenical relationships with Rome because of the conservative agreement they have over issues like abortion and same-sex marriage and other things that they condemn wholeheartedly along with the Roman Catholics.

So you have more people, whereas at one point, the social gospel of feeding the poor and digging wells in foreign impoverished nations and so on and doing all kinds of outwardly wonderful things, and this is not to condemn those things at all.

Yeah, humanitarian efforts.

Yeah, yes.

But when they become the gospel, that's when it becomes heresy. And the same would go with if somebody turns the gospel into fighting against abortion and homosexuality, that is also a departure from the gospel, even though we're supposed to, as Christians, oppose all evil things.

So you have these conservative churches caving in. So would you say that the rise of ecumenism is why we have this softness?

I would say two things. One would be the downplaying of doctrine in evangelical churches historically, emphasizing experience. And one might say that that's a residual of the Second Great Awakening, not so much the First Great Awakening, in my judgment.