Yesterday, I received the following questions from a member:
Rev. Spotts,
Where does Paul talk about baptism replacing circumcision? What HC Q&A talks about infant baptism? Canons of Dordt? BC? I’ve got a friend who says he needs to “do more research “ on infant baptism.
Thanks!
Now that I've had my coffee, I can begin to address these questions. It makes sense to share them with the church in case others are wondering, too.
The doctrinal standards to which Reformed churches historically subscribe, called the Three Forms of Unity, deal with infant baptism in several places (see excerpts copied further below):
As for, “where does Paul talk about baptism replacing circumcision?” The passage that comes to mind is Colossians 2:11-12:
“In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.” (ESV)
To be clear, Paul does not simply say that “baptism has replaced circumcision.” The comparison he makes, rather, is that both sacraments serve the same basic purpose on behalf of the recipients and community of faith.
First, both signs outwardly identify recipients with Christ's death and resurrection.
Consider the significance of circumcision given to Abraham and his descendants. In the act, one part of the body was violently removed and cast out from God's presence. Consequently, the rest of the person was counted ceremonially clean. Likewise, Christ was “cut off and cast away” from God's presence as though unclean in order to redeem and purify his true Body, the church. Abraham may not have fully grasped this typology; yet he received it as a “seal of the righteousness which he had by faith,” and therefore somehow connected to the promised “Seed of the woman” who would someday crush the serpent’s head, who would himself be bruised (cf. Gen 3:15). Similarly, baptism is an identification with Christ’s substitutionary death. By recalling Noah's flood and the Red Sea, the water signifies the deluge of divine wrath which fell on Christ in our place.
One might object, "since we can't know if babies believe the promises pictured in baptism, why give them the sign?"
The same objection could be raised about circumcision since, as has been noted, it was “a seal of the righteousness which Abraham had through faith” (Rom 4:11). Yet there is no doubt that circumcision was given to infants despite their apparent inability to repent and believe (see Lk 1:15 and Psa 22:9 on infants who were born again). This suggests the objection actually arises from a misunderstanding of the main purpose of these signs.
The covenantal signs were not given primarily to be symbols or statements of one’s own subjective experiences, whether of repentance, faith, conversion, or devotion. Were that so, the signs would be incapable of providing much comfort in times of personal weakness and sin. Rather, these sacraments graciously point us away from ourselves to the Gospel—to Christ's life-giving death and resurrection—so that we may receive the promises by faith alone. By these tangible symbols, God's hand reaches down to physically assure his church that he is happy to forgive and cleanse all who trust Christ, having given him up to death and raised him for our justification.
The Dual dynamic inherent to covenant signs
“These sacraments graciously point us away from ourselves to the Gospel—to Christ’s life-giving death and resurrection—so that we may receive the promises by faith alone. ”
Doubtless, many Jews were circumcised outwardly who never experienced inward transformation. By contrast, those Colossian Christians whom Paul addressed were physically uncircumcised, yet had been “circumcised with a circumcision made without hands.” That is, through the miracle of new birth the Holy Spirit had united them spiritually with Christ and his death. This same dual dynamic can be applied to baptism. One may have its outward application without having inward transformation, since only those regenerated by the Holy Spirit have been “baptized with a baptism made without hands.” But ideally, a person has both.
This dynamic also means we never content ourselves merely with external baptism, either for ourselves or our children. The ritual itself does not save our children, nor do we teach covenant children to disregard personal faith. Rather, infant baptism functions as circumcision did then, as an important, God-given tool for evangelizing and discipling them in the faith. It is a picture that compels them to receive the promises pledged to them from infancy, that God cleanses all who trust Christ alone.
Moreover, we accept that God alone can perform the inward miracle, even as it says in Titus 3:4-6,
"But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life."
Summing up
Both in Abraham's day and ours, there has been one people of God being saved by the same faith in Christ. At all times, God places the outward sign of the covenant upon adult professing believers as well as their children. By this means, he graciously establishes the external boundary of the visible church and points us to the Gospel. Therefore, one who rejects infant baptism on the basis that "babies are too little to repent and put faith in Jesus," has fundamentally misunderstood the significance of these signs, making them about what we do rather than what God does for his church through Christ, which is received by faith alone.
Finally, for those wishing to go deeper (pun intended), here is a thorough resource by Rev. Dr. R. Scott Clark:
A Curriculum For Those Wrestling Through Covenant Theology And Infant Baptism
I am grateful to have sat under him, not only as a professor at Westminster Seminary in California, but as my pastor at Oceanside URC, during my transition from credo baptism to the position I now believe most biblical, as well as truly catholic and historically Reformed. May God bless your own study and growth in the faith.
Postscript: Excerpts on Baptism from the Three Forms of Unity
Heidelberg Catechism Q. 74
Q.Should infants also be baptized?
A.Yes.
Infants as well as adults are included in God’s covenant and people,1
and they, no less than adults, are promised deliverance from sin through Christ’s blood and the Holy Spirit who works faith.2
Therefore, by baptism, the sign of the covenant, they too should be incorporated into the Christian church and distinguished from the children of unbelievers.3
This was done in the Old Testament by circumcision,4
which was replaced in the New Testament by baptism.5
1 Gen. 17:7; Matt. 19:14
2 Isa. 44:1–3O; Acts 2:38–39; 16:31
3 Acts 10:47; 1 Cor. 7:14
4 Gen. 17:9–14
5 Col. 2:11–13
Canons of Dort, Head 1, Art 17
Article 17: The Salvation of Deceased Infants of Believers
Since we must make judgments about God’s will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.
Article 34: The Sacrament of Baptism
We believe and confess that Jesus Christ, in whom the law is fulfilled, has by his shed blood put an end to every other shedding of blood, which anyone might do or wish to do in order to atone or satisfy for sins.
Having abolished circumcision, which was done with blood, he established in its place the sacrament of baptism. By it we are received into God’s church and set apart from all other people and alien religions, that we may be dedicated entirely to him, bearing his mark and sign. It also witnesses to us that he will be our God forever, since he is our gracious Father. Therefore he has commanded that all those who belong to him be baptized with pure water “in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” 77
In this way he signifies to us that just as water washes away the dirt of the body when it is poured on us and also is seen on the body of the baptized when it is sprinkled on him, so too the blood of Christ does the same thing internally, in the soul, by the Holy Spirit. It washes and cleanses it from its sins and transforms us from being the children of wrath into the children of God.
This does not happen by the physical water but by the sprinkling of the precious blood of the Son of God, who is our Red Sea, through which we must pass to escape the tyranny of Pharaoh, who is the devil, and to enter the spiritual land of Canaan.
So ministers, as far as their work is concerned, give us the sacrament and what is visible, but our Lord gives what the sacrament signifies—namely the invisible gifts and graces; washing, purifying, and cleansing our souls of all filth and unrighteousness; renewing our hearts and filling them with all comfort; giving us true assurance of his fatherly goodness; clothing us with the “new man” and stripping off the “old,” with all its works. 78
For this reason we believe that anyone who aspires to reach eternal life ought to be baptized only once without ever repeating it— for we cannot be born twice. Yet this baptism is profitable not only when the water is on us and when we receive it but throughout our entire lives. For that reason we detest the error of the Anabaptists who are not content with a single baptism once received and also condemn the baptism of the children of believers.
We believe our children ought to be baptized and sealed with the sign of the covenant, as little children were circumcised in Israel on the basis of the same promises made to our children. And truly, Christ has shed his blood no less for washing the little children of believers than he did for adults.
Therefore they ought to receive the sign and sacrament of what Christ has done for them, just as the Lord commanded in the law that by offering a lamb for them the sacrament of the suffering and death of Christ would be granted them shortly after their birth. This was the sacrament of Jesus Christ.
Furthermore, baptism does for our children what circumcision did for the Jewish people. That is why Paul calls baptism the “circumcision of Christ.”79
77 Matt. 28:19
78 Col. 3:9–10
79 Col. 2:11
