A Question on Baptism and WCF 28

[carlgobelman]

I'm posting this in the paedo-baptism forum for the sole reason that since the WCF is paedo this would be the right place...

My question is concerning WCF 28.1 & 28.6. Here are the relevant passages:

Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life. Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world. (WCF 28.1)

The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time. (WCF 28.6)

Regarding article 1 where it says "not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church," does this mean that at the very least baptism is seen as an entrance rite (for lack of a better phrase) into the visible church (i.e., membership)? In other words, we would all agree that not all that are in the church are in the church. Similarly, not all who are baptized into the church are baptized into Christ. Is that a correct understanding?

Related to the above question in article 6, it says, "The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered." As this would pertain to infants (this would be the obvious illustration), is the understanding that when an infant is baptized we are not to understand that the full benefits of the covenant of grace (see art. 1) are conferred to the infant at that time, but only when God, in his sovereign grace, effectually calls said infant later in life?

Also in article 6, what is meant by "the right use of this ordinance?"

Thanks!

 

[MW]

Regarding article 1 where it says "not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church," does this mean that at the very least baptism is seen as an entrance rite (for lack of a better phrase) into the visible church (i.e., membership)? In other words, we would all agree that not all that are in the church are in the church. Similarly, not all who are baptized into the church are baptized into Christ. Is that a correct understanding?

Yes and no. Strictly speaking, baptism is the solemn rite of being received into the visible church. James Bannerman writes,

The outward ordinances of the Christian society are so framed and devised as to be themselves a significant profession of faith on the part of those who join in them; and communion in ordinances is with Christians not a matter of choice, but of express command. Christ has judged it proper to appoint that His disciples shall be solemnly received into His church by the initiatory rite of baptism; so that the very entrance of life, or, at all events, the admission into the Christian society, shall be itself a public testimony to Him. (Church of Christ, 1:20).

Not all who are baptised outwardly are baptised and renewed inwardly by the Holy Spirit; but all who are baptised outwardly are baptised not only into the church but also into Christ, only it is classified as an external union.

Related to the above question in article 6, it says, "The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered." As this would pertain to infants (this would be the obvious illustration), is the understanding that when an infant is baptized we are not to understand that the full benefits of the covenant of grace (see art. 1) are conferred to the infant at that time, but only when God, in his sovereign grace, effectually calls said infant later in life?

Baptism does not confer any spiritual grace to infant or adult. It is purely an outward sign to the senses and an outward seal to faith. Nevertheless, there are outward benefits and common operations of the Spirit tied up with baptism, which are helpfully discussed in Larger Catechism answers 63, 68.

Also in article 6, what is meant by "the right use of this ordinance?"

See Larger Catechism answer 167.

 

[NRB]

According to the PCA New Member guide, which is entirely based on the WCF it states that the sacraments, ie baptism(which is being discussed here) and Communion do indeed confer blessing and Grace of GOD when appropriated in faith, although not inherently present in the sacraments.

So I'm now confused I think about Grace and Baptism in the eyes of the PCA and the WCF.
Is there a PCA alteration I didn't realize? I hope this doesn't derail this thread.
I am still speaking in the context of covenant baptism(I don't like paedo vs credo, I prefer Covanent vs Believer's baptism).

 

[Ron]

We do well to keep in mind that although baptism is a sign and seal of the inclusion of the person who is baptized in the covenant of grace, they ought to be baptized because they are members of Christ’s visible church. (That is a fine distinction the OPC order of worship teases out in the rite of baptism.) As a member of the church visible, to neglect this ordinance is in my estimation to place one outside this (visible) church, for baptism is the rite of inclusion. In a word, the unbaptized baby virtue of his standing in the church is to receive the rite of inclusion.

Robert Letham in his new book "The Westiminster Assembly (reading its theology in its theological context)" addresses the debate from various angles among the Divines. He notes that in the final analyses the Directory eventually concluded that before baptism children of believers are federally holy and, therefore, are to be baptized.

Ron

 

[Peairtach]

Quote from Carl

Regarding article 1 where it says "not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church," does this mean that at the very least baptism is seen as an entrance rite (for lack of a better phrase) into the visible church (i.e., membership)? In other words, we would all agree that not all that are in the church are in the church. Similarly, not all who are baptized into the church are baptized into Christ. Is that a correct understanding?

There are those who are baptismal/baptised members of the church only and
those who are both baptismal/baptised members and also communicant members.

If there is any under-age person who is baptised and unregenerate, or any of-age person who is baptised and taking the Lord's Supper who is unregenerate, then their are unsaved in the visible church. Hence the distinction between visible and invisible church.

In practice things can be slightly more complicated. You have those who have been baptised as children who have not come to the Lord's Supper for the first time who still come to worship services and otherwise associate with God's people; you have communicant members under church sanctions who are barred from the Lord's Table; you have people who are too ill to come to the Table; those who do not come to the Table for a time because of spiritual concerns, etc.

Quote from Carl

Related to the above question in article 6, it says, "The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered." As this would pertain to infants (this would be the obvious illustration), is the understanding that when an infant is baptized we are not to understand that the full benefits of the covenant of grace (see art. 1) are conferred to the infant at that time, but only when God, in his sovereign grace, effectually calls said infant later in life?

A covenant infant who is being baptised may have been regenerated in the womb, sometime in its life outside the womb before baptism, or at the time of baptism. Or it may not until later or not at all. the benefits could be conferred at the time of baptism if God wanted to do that.

Often it's later. See e.g. Samuel, who had been circumcised for a number of years, when it is said that he did not yet know the LORD (I Samuel 3:7)

The sons of Eli had been circumcised for much longer but they did not know the LORD (I Sam. 2:12) And we are to presume from the Scripture record that they never came to know the LORD as Saviour, but only as judge. Their covenant privileges were turned by their sin into curses, in God's secret decretive will.

Adults who come to profess faith by baptism may have been regenerated early in life e.g. in the womb, or nearer to the time of their baptism, or they may not be regenerated until later or not at all.

The sooner an adult or infant is regenerated, the better.