[RnMomof7]

I am having a hard time understanding this article..it seems the author is saying that Calvin believed that baptism grants justification (by infusion?)???

That is far different than the traditional covenential teaching found in Presbyterian churchs today..

[Cleburne]

Baptism is an ingrafting into Christ, but it is not a "get into heaven free" token. Faith is still our justification- indeed, for baptism to be of any effect at all towards us the reciever of it must possess a lively, enduring faith.

That is far different than the traditional covenential teaching found in Presbyterian churchs today...

Calvin's high view of the sacrament has been, either conciously or unconciously, rejected by many if not most of his heirs these days.

Baptismal Efficacy and the Reformed Tradition: Past, Present, and Future, from the same source as the one above, delves further into the historic Reformed baptismal positions.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I am having a hard time understanding this article..it seems the author is saying that Calvin believed that baptism grants justification (by infusion?)??? That is far different than the traditional covenential teaching found in Presbyterian churchs today...

I believe that it is more correct to say, Calvin believes that Baptism respresents Justification (by imputation).

We shouldn't just "take the author's word" for it, even though I am sure he is making an honest attempt to analyze Calvin's theology. We should read the Calvin citations in question, for ourselves.

It is true that Calvin had a "high view" of the Baptismal Sacrament. But we can't just say, "Calvin had a high view of the Baptismal Sacrament" and leave it at that, as thought he were practically Roman Catholic on the matter. Calvin did indeed have a "high view" of the Baptismal Sacrament, but it definitely was NOT Roman Catholic.

Re-read the citations in question -- with my emphasis in bold, as a Presbyterian Calvinist:

"Now baptism was given to us by God for these ends (which I have taught to be common to all sacraments): first to serve our faith before him; secondly, to serve our confession before men...Accordingly, they [e.g., the Zwinglians and Anabaptists] who regarded baptism as nothing but a token and mark by which we confess our religion before men, as soldiers bear the insignia of their commander as a mark of their profession, have not weighed what was the chief point of baptism" [4]. Baptism, in reality, is God's work: "For inasmuch as [baptism] is given for the arousing, nourishing, and confirming of our faith, (note this point especially -- the confirming of faith. I.E., Calvin believed that Baptism confirms Faith, not that it "grants" faith) it is to be received as from the hand of the Author himself. We ought to deem it certain and proved that it is he who speaks to us through the sign; that it is he who purifies and washes away sins, and wipes out the remembrance of them; that it is he who make us sharers in his death, who deprives Satan of his rule, who weakens the power of our lust; indeed, that it is he who comes into a unity with us so that, having put on Christ, we may be acknowledged God's children. These things, I say, he performs for our soul within as truly and surely as we see our body outwardly cleansed, submerged, and surrounded with water [5]...And he does not feed our eyes with a mere appearance only, but leads us to the present reality and effectively performs what he symbolizes" [6].

"The first thing that the Lord sets out for us is that baptism should be a token and proof of our cleansing; or (the better to explain what I mean) it is like a sealed document to confirm to us that all our sins are so abolished, remitted, and effaced that they can never come to his sight, be recalled, or charged against us."

"Baptism also brings another benefit, for it shows us our mortification in Christ, and new life in him...[T]hrough baptism Christ makes us sharers in his death, that we may be engrafted in it" [9].

In Calvin's view, then, Baptism serves our Faith as it serves our confession before men... it confirms that which it symbolizes, as a token and proof which shows us our mortification in Christ.

Baptism does not "grant" faith. It serves Faith, it confirms Faith, it shows and symbolizes Faith... but nowhere does Calvin ever imply that it "grants" Faith. Mainly because, Calvin himself does not believe that Baptism "grants" faith -- rather, it "arouses, nourishes, and confirms faith" as a true Means of Grace (that is, a "sacrament")

As such, Calvin's view -- though highly sacramental -- was in some ways closer in theology to his AnaBaptist Opponents than to the Roman Catholics around him.

The disagreement, of course, would be whether or not it is true, as Calvin maintained, that the Infant Children of faithful believers could recieve the Gift of Faith even in infancy, and thus be accounted legitimate claimants to the "arousing, nourishing, and confirming of our faith" which is imparted in Baptism.

To which Calvinist Presbyterians can only cite the example of John the Baptist, and affirm: "Guilty as Charged". We believe that God is Faithful in his Promises to obedient Christian Evangelists; and likewise, We believe that God is Faithful in his Promises to obedient Christian Parents.

But we do not believe (and neither did Calvin) that Baptism "grants" faith. Rather, the sacrament serves for the "arousing, nourishing, and confirming" of that Faith which has already been imparted to Covenant Children... even in their mother's womb.

best, op