shackleton
Puritan Board Junior
I have been reading about the sacraments lately and in reading about baptism I am a little confused. There seems to be a contradiction, or a disconnect. It almost seems like there would have to be one way of salvation for adults and another for infants, if the notion behind infant baptism were correct.
An interesting quote from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology book 3 page 546 in the section on infant baptism, "The difficulty on this subject is that baptism from its very nature involves a profession of faith; it is the way in which by the ordinance of Christ, He is to be confessed before men; but infants are incapable of making such confession; therefore they are not the proper subjects of baptism. Or, to state the matter in another form: the sacraments belong to the members of the Church; but the Church is the company of believers; infants cannot exercise faith, therefore they are not members of the Church, and consequently ought not to be baptized ."
WCF 28:1 states, ":1 Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ (Mat 28:19), not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church (1 Cor 12:13); but also, to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace (Rom 4:11 with Col 2:11, 12), of his ingrafting into Christ (Rom 6:5; Gal 3:27), of regeneration (Titus 3:5), of remission of sins (Mark 1:4), and of his giving up unto God through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life (Rom 6:3, 4). Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world (Matt 28:19, 20)."
It does almost leave one (me anyway) with the lingering question that there would have to be two methods of salvation. One for adults, which is the way laid out in the New Testament, and another for babies. Does God suspend what he says is true for everyone else for the sake of babies who are not capable of believing? The answers I have read are along the lines of, babies would have to then be regenerated in the womb. This seems absurd but it is the logical conclusion one must come to in order to have babies who die before being regenerated, saved. On the other hand I do not believe God overlooks sin until a magical age of accountability. If we are all born sinful then we would all be responsible for having our sin atoned for and since the atoning of sin comes through justification through faith the person justified would have to be capable of having faith.
It seems like paedobaptism leads to an inevitable contradiction.
On the subject I have read Hodge, Calvin, Turritin, Grudem, A.H. Strong. The problem arose while reading and I came to an understanding of what baptism does, as stated in WCF 28, the disconnect came when trying to fit babies into this formula, where the quote from Hodge comes in.
Could it be possible that if baptism is New Testament circumcision that it would only be for those who have made a profession of faith? Since both these are required for entrance into the church. Since the church is the new covenant community and circumcision was the entrance into the Abrahamic covenant community, then wouldn't it be correct to say that baptism would only be for believers?
My conclusion:
Church is new covenant community
Must be a believer to be a member of the church as evidenced by a profession of faith, which is followed by baptism.
Confession and baptism make one a member of the new covenant community
Therefore baptism is the new circumcision but only for believers.
An interesting quote from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology book 3 page 546 in the section on infant baptism, "The difficulty on this subject is that baptism from its very nature involves a profession of faith; it is the way in which by the ordinance of Christ, He is to be confessed before men; but infants are incapable of making such confession; therefore they are not the proper subjects of baptism. Or, to state the matter in another form: the sacraments belong to the members of the Church; but the Church is the company of believers; infants cannot exercise faith, therefore they are not members of the Church, and consequently ought not to be baptized ."
WCF 28:1 states, ":1 Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ (Mat 28:19), not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church (1 Cor 12:13); but also, to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace (Rom 4:11 with Col 2:11, 12), of his ingrafting into Christ (Rom 6:5; Gal 3:27), of regeneration (Titus 3:5), of remission of sins (Mark 1:4), and of his giving up unto God through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life (Rom 6:3, 4). Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world (Matt 28:19, 20)."
It does almost leave one (me anyway) with the lingering question that there would have to be two methods of salvation. One for adults, which is the way laid out in the New Testament, and another for babies. Does God suspend what he says is true for everyone else for the sake of babies who are not capable of believing? The answers I have read are along the lines of, babies would have to then be regenerated in the womb. This seems absurd but it is the logical conclusion one must come to in order to have babies who die before being regenerated, saved. On the other hand I do not believe God overlooks sin until a magical age of accountability. If we are all born sinful then we would all be responsible for having our sin atoned for and since the atoning of sin comes through justification through faith the person justified would have to be capable of having faith.
It seems like paedobaptism leads to an inevitable contradiction.
On the subject I have read Hodge, Calvin, Turritin, Grudem, A.H. Strong. The problem arose while reading and I came to an understanding of what baptism does, as stated in WCF 28, the disconnect came when trying to fit babies into this formula, where the quote from Hodge comes in.
Could it be possible that if baptism is New Testament circumcision that it would only be for those who have made a profession of faith? Since both these are required for entrance into the church. Since the church is the new covenant community and circumcision was the entrance into the Abrahamic covenant community, then wouldn't it be correct to say that baptism would only be for believers?
My conclusion:
Church is new covenant community
Must be a believer to be a member of the church as evidenced by a profession of faith, which is followed by baptism.
Confession and baptism make one a member of the new covenant community
Therefore baptism is the new circumcision but only for believers.