|
BAPTIST PRINCIPLES RESET
PART 2
—CHAPTER 2.
The
Subjects of Baptism.
BY
ALVAH HOVEY, D. D., LL.D.
I may as well begin with a
confession of personal faith, which is: That the only proper subjects of
Christian baptism are persons who trust in Jesus Christ as their Redeemer and
Lord; not believers in Christ, together with their households, including
servants; nor believers in Christ, together with their children, of whatever
age; nor believers in Christ, with their helpless babes; but solely believers in
Christ, who thereby confess their allegiance to him. This is the creed of
Baptists in respect to the proper subjects of the first Christian ordinance.
And, to the best of my knowledge, they have always held. and do now hold with
undiminished confidence, this article of their faith, to be supported, first, by
the narrative and expository references to baptism in the New Testament;
secondly, by the nature of the Christian religion itself; and, thirdly, by the
history of Christendom in so far as it pertains to this subject.
First, then, the narrative and
expository references to baptism in the New Testament show that it was
administered to persons who repented of sin or believed in Christ; and, in the
case of those who hoard the gospel, repentance and faith were inseparable; every
believer began his life of trust in the Lord Jesus by repentance towards God.
Thus on the day of Pentecost the people who "were pierced in their
heart," and "received the word of Peter, were baptized." In like
manner, when Philip went down to the city of Samaria and preached to them the
Christ, those who "believed Philip preaching good tidings concerning the
kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ were baptized, both men and
women." Equally plain is it that Saul of Tarsus was already a believing
man, willing to obey the Lord Jesus, who appeared to him on the way to Damascus,
before he was baptized by Ananias. The same was also true of Cornelius, the
Roman centurion; of Lydia, the seller of purple, and her household; of the
Philippian jailer and all his; and of the twelve disciples whom Paul rebaptized
at Ephesus, evidently because they had not by their previous baptism confessed
their intelligent faith in Christ as the giver of the Holy Spirit and the head
of a spiritual kingdom. Indeed, we find no instance of the giving of baptism
intentionally to any but persons having faith in Christ. And there is good
reason to think that the apostle would not have rebaptized the twelve disciples
at Ephesus, if they had heard and understood all that John the Baptist had
taught respecting One mightier than himself, who would baptize them in the Holy
Spirit.
It will be remembered at the same
time that the baptism of John, whatever may have been its relation to that
commanded by Christ, was offered by him to none but those who were called to
repentance and confession of their sins. Mark says that "they were baptized
by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins." Thus the first use of
this significant rite in connection with the new order of things was apparently
limited to persons who sought it of their own accord, and by it professed to
enter upon a new and inward religious life. And if proselyte baptism was in use
before the time of Christ, which is very doubtful, I am not aware of any
evidence that it was administered to any class of people, old or young, as a
substitute for circumcision. Thus the narrative references to baptism in the New
Testament support our conviction that its proper subjects are persons who trust
in Jesus Christ as their Redeemer and Lord.
It is true, however, that there
are three instances of the baptism of households, or families, mentioned in the
New Testament?namely, those of Lydia, of the Philippian jailer, and of
Stephanas; but an impartial study of the narratives fails to discover in them
the slightest evidence of an infant or unbelieving member in any of these
households. It requires a creative imagination, like that of the late
distinguished Horace Bushnell, to make such a discovery. A few years ago, the
pastor of our church at Newton Centre, Mass., found that it had on its roll of
members the names of not less than thirty entire families, all of them having
been baptized on profession of faith in Christ. They comprised, in fact, about
one-third of the whole church.
The doctrine of believer?s
baptism is also supported by expository references to this ordinance in the New
Testament. Peter?s answer to the question of those who were pierced in their
heart and said, "Brethren, what shall we do?" was this: "Repent
and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, unto remission
of your sins"?language which certainly gives a leading place to the
action of the subjects of baptism in submitting to that ordinance. In striking
agreement with this is Paul?s account of what Ananias said to him in Damascus:
"And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,
calling on his name." To the same effect is the apostle?s word to the
Galatians: "For ye are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus; for
all ye who were baptized into Christ did put on Christ." The ritual and
symbolic confession of their union with Christ was as much their own act as was
their faith in him. And no less clearly does Peter, in his First Epistle, refer
to the moral participation of the subjects of baptism in the act performed. The
saving efficacy of baptism is ascribed to its relation to conscience; not the
conscience of parents, of sponsors, or of administrators, but the conscience of
the persons baptized. In all these and some other passages forgiveness of sins,
union with Christ, or being saved, is connected with baptism, either because the
new life begins with baptism or because its beginning is normally expressed by
baptism, the sign being put for the thing signified. We believe the latter
explanation to be correct; for the apostle Paul claims to have been the
spiritual father of the Corinthian saints, saying: "I write not these
things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For if ye have
ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet not many fathers; for in. Christ Jesus,
through the gospel, I begat you." The gospel, not baptism, was the means of
their conversion; for Paul, in the first chapter of this very Epistle, disclaims
baptizing them, with the exception of a very few, and rejoices in the fact that
he had been sent, not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.
Secondly, our conviction that the
only proper subjects of Christian baptism are persons who trust in Jesus Christ
as their Redeemer and Lord is supported by the nature of the Christian religion.
If there is anything which is taught with absolute clearness by the Saviour and
his apostles, it is the personal and spiritual nature of our religion. This
religion is neither national nor tribal, neither Semitic nor Greek. Pedigree is
of no account without faith, and faith is a personal act. The history of Ishmael
and Esau, of Absalom and Manasseh, proves that hereditary grace is a fiction.
The scientific facts of heredity may, indeed, suggest that religious character
is transmissible from parents to children; but the history of mankind disproves
the reality of this transmission, and the words of Christ, "Unless a man be
born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God," confirm that disproof.
When we think of the gospel as a
message of religious truth to beings of a religious nature, we at once perceive
its fitness to arouse thought and feeling, thus leading to action and affecting
their spiritual condition. There is no disparity between the means and the end.
We assent to the testimony of Paul that the gospel is the power of God unto
salvation to every one that believes; but we perceive no such adaptation of
means to ends in the baptism of infants. For them the rite has no illuminating
or convincing power. Its pictorial impressive
testimony to an inward change, or even to the need of an inward change, is not
made or appropriated by them. They are simply passive subjects, unconscious of
any spiritual meaning in what is done. If the Spirit of God words at all through
the medium of consecrated water, it must work in a merely physical way, utterly
foreign to the spiritual character of the Christian religion as this is
described in the New Testament.
Thirdly, our conviction, that the
only proper subjects of baptism are persons who trust in Jesus Christ as their
Redeemer and Lord, is supported by the history of Christendom. This proposition
cannot be fully justified in a brief article. A thorough discussion of the
events which are believed to justify it would fill more than one respectable
volume. But the principle on which the argument for our proposition rests is
obvious and sound?namely, that a rule for Christian action in church life,
which has been found conducive to purity in that life, is presumably founded on
the will of Christ. And if any important modification of the rule can be shown
to have marred the peace or spirituality of that life in its corporate
manifestations, this fact will also go to confirm the rule as an expression of
the Lord?s will.
Now, it may be said, in brief,
that the practice of restricting baptism to believers in Christ has always been
a protest against the dogma of baptismal regeneration, and, by parity of reason,
against the whole theory of sacramental grace. It has also been an obstacle to
the union of Church and State and to the use of civil power in support of
religion. There were a few Munsterites among the Anabaptists of Germany, but
most of the Anabaptists were peaceable citizens, dying for their faith, but not
fighting for it. And so it has been everywhere with Christians who have rejected
infant baptism. They have been often subject to persecution, but have
consistently refused to persecute others. And this has been the logical outcome
of their position as to the proper subjects of baptism?a position which puts
upon every soul of man the responsibility of deciding for himself concerning the
service of God.
It has been truly said that ideas
in the long run bear rule, that the beliefs of men determine their conduct. It
is, therefore, of the first importance that our belief concerning the proper
subjects of baptism should agree, first, with a true conception of the Christian
religion; secondly, with a true conception of Christian churches as groups of
men and women united together of their own choice for the service of Christ;
and, thirdly, with a true conception of the relation of both these to the State,
which is entrusted by the will of God with civil authority. And if, as the
writer seriously holds, the Baptist position is the only safe and defensible
one, it must be maintained with the utmost firmness and charity.
Newton Centre, Mass.
The Reformed Reader Home Page
Copyright 1999, The Reformed Reader, All Rights Reserved |