Since, this Dilbert aptly describes my work week, I'm making every attempt to use my time wisely, including, but not limited to, studying, perusing online articles (both frivolous and educational), changing car insurance companies, and preparing for small group.We're in Romans these days, Chapter 9:1-29. Reading versus 6-8, Paul is describing the makeup of Israel : not all natural children are included, and others are adopted in as children of the promise. Tim Keller points to the distinction between physical and spiritual descendents, using the examples of Isaac and Ishmael, and Jacob and Esau. (From Keller’s Romans: A Study Course in the Gospel). This passage suggests a decisive break in the Jewish ethnic-descendent requirements of the OT. But what are the implications for the elect today? More on that in a moment.
Sunday I witnessed my first covenant baptism. I've seen infant baptisms before, but never administered in the Reformed tradition, or enveloped with the understanding of Reformed theology. Like much of my newfound awareness of grace, Sunday's baptism was awesome, in all verity and proper use of the word. The covenant relationship between promise and people, the foreshadowing and connection of circumcision and baptism, and the affirmation of a community that it is by His merciful choosing any of us can stand and call ourselves His, were all present with the sprinkling of water on a crying baby’s head. (And boy, did he cry!)
But now, pairing my experience on Sunday with the passage above, I have questions. I'm sure they are short of profound, and I'm not entirely perplexed; I'm just in the process of fleshing things out, and I'm bringing the two of you who read this blog along for the ride.
Are all children born into covenant families covenant children, i.e., chosen children of the promise? Doesn't this place the emphasis back on parental, physical lineage? I've just barely begun to scratch the surface of articles available online on this subject, but if anyone has authors to point me towards, that would be great.
There are some harsh criticisms for the failure of covenant parents who raise children that do not produce lives of faith. However, what I've found in general is more along the lines of the following excerpts:
"The situation of children who are born of believing parents is a special one. They do not have in themselves that quality of faith which is in the adult believer. Yet it cannot be the case that those who have been sanctified by birth and have been separated from the children of unbelievers, do not have the seed and germ of faith. The promise, accepted by the parents in faith, also includes their children to a thousand generations. . . . If it is objected that not all of them who are born of believing parents are elect, seeing that God did not choose all the children of Abraham and Isaac, we do not lack an answer. Though we do not deny that this is the case, still we say that this hidden judgment must be left to God and that normally, by virtue of the promise, all who have been born of believing parents, or if one of the parents believes, are sanctified." (Beza, Confessio Christianae Fidei , IV, 48).
"We do not ascribe this (the enjoyment of the benefits of the covenant) to birth in the flesh as the principle and true cause, for our children's salvation is only by the election and mercy of God, which often accompanies natural birth. . . This is not out of necessity, for the promise is not generally applicable to the whole seed but only to that seed in which election converges. . . But because we must not curiously investigate the hidden providence and election of God, we assume that the children of believers are holy, as long as in growing up they do not demonstrate themselves to be estranged from Christ. We do not exclude them from the church, but accept them as members, with the hope that they are partakers of the divine election and have the grace and Spirit of Christ, even as they are the seed of saints. On that basis we baptize them. We do not need to respond to those who object and ask whether the minister is deceived, whether perhaps the infant is in truth no child of the promise, of divine election and mercy. Similar diatribes could be adduced with regard to adults, for we do not know whether they come deceptively, whether they truly believe, whether they are children of election or perdition, etc." (Martyr, Loci Communes , IV,
8, 7).
I sense that my introverted brain is taking longer to process things theses days – a sure sign that I need to take more time for purposeful reflection as the intensity of the semester increases. I haven’t forgotten the post I promised on my response to Gaffin’s article. I just got my prof’s response today, and I’ll be mulling over his answers and Scripture references this evening.
4 comments:
When you speak of "covenant children," I am not sure what you mean. Can you give a passage in the Bible that describes this particular covenant?
Anon – great question. To do the answer justice, I’d have to give a lengthy discourse about covenant theology, a doctrine held by Reformed churches. I’ll try to summarize. Reformed theology states that G-d’s saving acts are revealed in the form of covenants (promises), between G-d and his people, but initiated and sustained by G-d alone. The idea of a “covenant community” stems from the confessing Church as an extension of the chosen people under the covenant of works of the Old Testament (the Israelites), where by believers in Christ are now under the new covenant of grace.
R. Scott Clark fleshes this out, with Scripture references, here: http://www.wscal.edu/clark/ecclesiology.php. I’d also direct you to G. I. Williamson’s study guide for The Westminster Confession of Faith; sections VII and XXVIII address G-d’s covenant with man and baptism, respectively.
Stemming from the idea of covenant community, covenant children would be those born to Christ confessing parents. Just as the Lord’s Supper echoes the Passover, so baptism reflects the covenantal sign of circumcision, and according to Reformed theology, is administered to infants as a sign and seal of the promise of grace under G-d’s covenant.
Thank you for your answer. What I get from all of that is that these various covenants, (children, community, grace, etc.) are not actually given by God, but rather they are made by man.
How can you be certain, then, that God will keep the end of the covenant assigned to Him by man? Isn't this exactly backwards? Shouldn't we be starting with the covenants given by God, and then try to understand what part, if any, we have in keeping them?
Anon – once again, great questions. But I fear I did a poor job elucidating last time. While it’s true that some of the terms I referenced (covenant children, covenant community) are extrabiblical, these descriptions developed out of centuries of church history, all based on the very real and very G-d-established covenant of the Old and New Testaments.
Your question is exactly on target – we have no business with any covenant not established by G-d, and we certainly have no ability to keep them on our own. The covenant of grace illustrates that very point: we are utterly degenerate and must rely solely on the grace of G-d displayed in the redemptive work of Christ on the cross to bring us salvation. It is He who sets the terms of the covenant, and only He can uphold them.
As I said before, Reformed theology states that G-d’s saving acts are revealed in the form of covenants (promises), between G-d and his people, but initiated and sustained by G-d alone. The term I used, covenant of works, relates to the Law given to Moses, and the covenant thereby established with the Israelites as G-d’s chosen people. (Deut 4:13; 6:4-9) This is widely recognized (not just in Reformed churches) as G-d acting to establish a covenant, the Old Covenant. (Some argue that there are several “smaller” covenants by G-d throughout the Old Testament – Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Moses, etc. I see all these promises as part of the greater whole covenant of works.) In the New Testament, we see the fulfillment of the covenant of works in the covenant of grace. Christ came to fulfill the Law (works) by grace through his death on the cross. This is also called the New Covenant. (Lk 22:20; Heb 8:6-13)
I apologize if my last reply was confusing, but I think we are on the same page here. The concepts of covenant community and covenant children are the “working out” of our “role” in G-d’s covenant.
Post a Comment