This book, edited by Gregg Strawbridge, is a collection of 15 essays and an introductory piece by 16 authors, presumably invited by Dr. Strawbridge to participate in this project, as an ongoing part of his campaign on behalf of the titular baptism of children into the covenant in Christ's blood. He was the general editor of a second work that I hope to include in my series of reviews of work on Covenant theology, which similarly arranges pieces in favor of paedocommunion.
Unlike that work, however, which appears to be largely a collaboration between various men affiliated in one sense or another with the "Federal Vision movement" (as befits it's thesis), "Covenantal Infant Baptism" (hereafter CIB) was put together by a veritable who's who of the Reformed and Presbyterian community, representing various denominations, hermeneutical leanings, seminaries, churches and States of the Union. Most notably perhaps, this panoply includes Dr. Strawbridge, two other CREC ministers (Jeffrey Niell and Douglas Wilson), and Peter Leithart, but also includes men who have operated in direct contradiction to the positions of the FV movement considered as a general "idea", notably Cornelis Venema and Joseph Pipa. While these men therefore have distinct differences on issues like confessional subscription, eschatology, paedocommunion and it's attendant ecclesiological issues, and the nature of the distinction between the Covenants of Grace and Works, they have placed diverse hands on a single plow to uphold the titular case: namely that the children of at least one believing parent are part of the Covenant of Grace, and therefore worthy of the sign of that covenant, water baptism. Some of the more intriguing aspects of the book, however, come from the fact that not all the hands appear to be directing the plow to the same furrow even on the issue from which they supposedly derive unity. This blog will address this issue more in the future, but for now, I note in passing that both the inclusion of Dr. Leithart in the project, and the fact that many of the signatories of the "joint statement on Federal Vision" believe that children are not in the covenant intrinsically, but by virtue of water baptism, may indicate that where the future of Presbyterian sacramentalism is concerned, "the center cannot hold".
After the even-handed introduction by Dr. Strawbridge, the book is loosely organized into "topics" or rather, general areas of interest to the defender of covenant baptism. Loosely, these are: the origin and nature of baptism, the oikos (household) function of baptism, the biblio-linguistic basis for the purpose and mode of baptism, baptism in covenant theology, baptism and baptismal polemics in history, and "theology of children". Some of these areas will be more interesting to those reading the book in order to "give an answer", while others are more items of general interest on the topic.
The two essays on the "oikos formula", presented by Joel Beeke, Ray Lanning, and Johnathan Watt, demonstrate adequately the arguments from covenant continuity (e.g., that children were put into the substance of the Covenant of Grace in Abraham's day, and there is no explicit biblical warrant to put them out) and the federal nature of baptism (in juxtaposition to our modern individualistic mindset). However, in my opinion they fail to adequately address some of the calls for consistency offered by credobapists, particularly to some of paedobaptists who make the family model the hinge turning the whole issue.* For example, the issue of the baptism, or otherwise, of unbelieving spouses is left almost untouched throughout the whole volume.
While Mark Ross presents an intriguing look at the exegetical foundation for Westminster's confirmation of baptism as a "sign and seal", the subsequent essay on mode by Joseph Pipa wanders into the woods in several places. Although the linguistic case for baptism by pouring is adequately expounded, equal time is not given to the validity of immersion. The notion of pouring or sprinkling as adequate only for young children, or for adults also is left untouched, and Pipa presents the rather interesting idea that regenerate Christians, who are "dead to sin", have only one nature, which is not a sin nature. (Kindle location 1350) While Pipa affirms that we are "not sinless", he fails to address Paul's notion of "the old man's" abiding presence within himself and that "what he does he hates", or to give a theology of "the flesh" that accounts for indwelling sin, if man no longer has a sin nature. While this is not the subject of the book, or even Pipa's essay, it created an undue distraction from the primary thesis that baptism is a sign and symbol of regeneration, which this blogger grants.
The concluding essays of the book, by Douglas Wilson and R.C. Sproul, Jr. are macro-level analyses of the "family church" which broaden and personalize the application of the oikos formula and the one-substance, multiple administrations (OSMA) position on the covenants. The specific goal of the two is to expose inconsistencies in the family theology of credobaptist heads of household, while presenting an understanding of covenant baptism that transcends the categories of both ex opere operato sacramentalism and the concept of the "wet baby dedication". They accomplish this task with Wilson's signature wit and Sproul's typical lack of sensitivity to weasel-words, as well as with a great deal of love for their "opponents" and a pastoral mindset throughout. One can only hope the aftermath of the revelation of Sproul's fall regarding the Ashley Madison scandal will lead to true and repentant restoration for him, as such sin issues cloud exemplary work in the realm of comparative theology.
In contrast, the low point of the book for me was rather strange little piece on the history of paedobaptism in the church by Peter Leithart. I approached his contribution to the work with some trepidation given his prior statements (recorded in numerous other works) on sacramentology, and I could not help feeling that it was only with the greatest reluctance that Dr. Leithart refrained from inserting views into the piece that would have met with disagreement, if not horror on the part of some of the other contributors. Specifically, his assertion that "the most serious threat to paedobaptism is posed...by compromised paedobaptists, who shrink from the full implications of their position and fail to embody their theology in practice" (2815), leads me to wonder, given the greater context of Leithart's systematics, what exactly he believes the "full implications" of the position in question are. Additionally, if one is expecting a rousing defense of the historicity of paedobaptism, particularly in the early church, one will find neither that defense, nor the conviction that Dr. Leithart is especially concerned to provide it.
By far the most important part of the book, to my mind, is located appropriately near the middle: namely, the defenses of the OSMA position, and it's corollary parallel between circumcision and baptism. This falls to four chapters by Jeff Niell, Richard Pratt, Randy Booth, and Cornelis Venema. The first two deal with the absolutely vital issue of exegesis, counter-exegesis, and hermeneutics of Hebrews 8:8-13 and it's citation of Jeremiah 31:31-34, which as I have stated elsewhere in "Notes", has become a key passage, perhaps the chair passage for the confessional, covenantal credobaptist position. Thankfully, both Niell and Booth take special care to validate and address the concerns of those holding that view, although even here, the diversity (and perhaps in our present day, fluidity) of the covenant baptist perspective shines through, in that the two offer what could be viewed as contrasting viewpoints of the same passage.
In what may be the most important essay in the book, Niell goes through things that are not new in the new covenant that are presented in the Hebrews 8 passage so as to describe things that the passage cannot be describing in the fulfillment of the covenant in Christ's blood. These include internalization of religion (including the writing of the law "on the heart" of man), divine initiative in confirmation of the covenant, personal relationship between God and the covenant members, knowledge of the Lord (surely regenerate people in the post-Sinaitic administration possessed this in some form) and Divine mercy proffered to men (without which there could be no regenerate persons in the first place). Niell then goes on to lay out an argument based both on linguistic analysis of the phrases "from the least to the greatest" and "know the Lord", and the context of Hebrews generally (which is predominantly about leaving behind the types and shadows and pressing on into the fulfillment, which is in Christ, a massive epistolary theme of the New Testament generally.) Niell concludes that "knowing the Lord, from the least to the greatest" is first and foremost about the abolition of the old priesthood and it's host of fallible human intermediaries, and the expanded egalitarianism in the transmission of the infallible mediation of Christ to the universal priesthood of the believer. (1660) Additionally, he advances the case that the "law written on the heart" in fulfillment of Jeremiah is the ceremonial law, which the context of Hebrews establishes as being fulfilled in Christ and no longer obligatory for the Christian. (1597) Space does not permit going into Niell's arguments in exhaustive detail, but it would suffice to say that I highly recommend this essay in particular to anyone currently wrestling with the issue of baptism, or study of covenant administration generally. The essay's (seemingly) exhaustive treatment of what is not new about the New Covenant is particularly helpful, even outside the immediate subject of the book, as systems which do not hold the OSMA formula can often hold deep misunderstandings about the role of Old Testament saints before God.
The difficulty with taking in Pratt's essay on the heels of Niell's, is that Pratt may appear, at first glance, to be accepting the credobaptist assumptions about the New Covenant, including the idea that "no man will teach his neighbor, and no man his brother, saying 'know the Lord'" means that all members of the covenant are regenerate. However, Pratt is, on a close reading, bringing up something I addressed in my prior review of Gary Long's work on NCT: that there are two parallel elements cooexisting in Hebrews 8 that make it untenable as the "chair passage" for the Reformed Baptist understanding of the New Covenant: namely, that there are elements of the promise therein that are only for the elect (which are fulfilled in the live of every believer), but that an eschatological element remains to the covenant in Christ's blood that makes parts of the promise yet-unfulfilled. Should one remain unconvinced, for example, by Niell's argument that the context of Hebrews dictates that chapter 8 deals predominantly with the abrogation/fulfillment of the ceremonial law, the other facets of the promise are encapsulated in the "already/not yet" hermeneutic skillfully expanded upon by Pratt. The important thing to note here is that these two heremenutical principles are not mutually exclusive. While the harmonization was not explicit to CIB, one must remember that the fulfillment of the ceremonial law is a promise presently realized for the whole covenant community (the Church visible) while the present reality of salvation in the blood of Christ and perfect knowledge of the Lord is only a present reality for the elect (the Church invisible) but that that reality has a teleological goal of expansion that adheres to the already/not yet advance of the Kingdom. This is particularly manifest when we draw parallels to other covenant prophecies of the OT prophets, for example, the idea of the knowledge of the Lord covering the earth as the water covers the sea (Is. 11:9, Hk. 2:14). This is a reason that I believe that covenant baptism walks hand-in-hand with a postmillenial eschatology; but that is a subject for another post.
The latter half of the four essays on baptism as present within OSMA present more "macro-level" analysis of the historical/Westminsterian justification for CIB, which transitions smoothly into the historical essays proper. I pause here only to note in passing that the post-"Klinean republication" view of Michael Horton's "Covenant Theology" comes under skillful fire from Cornelis Venema, particularly in Horton's distinction of the Sinaitic Covenant (including the publication of the moral law) as a "works-covenant" and the Abrahamic Covenant as purely a "Royal Grant" (e.g., one without expectations of, or promised sanctions on, the human "signatories" of the covenant). The conditional nature of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 17 is exposited, and Venema's work here provides material for a possible review of Horton on "Notes". Part of my concern there (totally aside from the form-critical basis of Klinean republication generally) revolves around the fact that this disjunction in nature between the "absolute" Abrahamic and the "conditional" Sinaitic may prove too much, in that lack of conditions and sanctions for the overarching basis of the one Covenant of Grace could be consistently shown to undermine the traditional basis for CIB. However, expanding on that score will have to wait for future entries.
It may be premature, given the wealth of apologetic literature from both sides on the baptism issue, to label "CIB" the relevant work on the subject, but it cannot be denied that a treasure-trove of argumentation and relevant background to the topic is present here. For those with a vested interest in the subject material, you owe it to yourself to pick it up. Those already convinced prior to reading the work may find it superfluous, but on top of the concentration of diverse arguments and writing styles in one approachable work, it can give insight into the future if interior debate in the Presbyterian and Reformed community on sacramentology. For dedicated students of both baptismal persuasions, particularly Reformed ones, this is as close to a "must read" as I can get.
5/5
In Christ,
~JS
*For an example of paedobaptist presentation under fire that I believe may rely too heavily on the oikos formula, see this debate between Dr. James White (a classic, and published, adherent to Hebrews 8 as "chair passage"), and Dr. Bill Shisko.
