Thursday, February 16, 2006

Infant baptism and presumptive regeneration

Letter, Geerhardus Vos to B. B. Warfield, 12 February 1891, in Letters, 147:

...Is Dr. Kuyper correct in representing his theory as the proper Calvinistic view of infant baptism? Did the older theologians really mean that that baptism in each case presupposes regeneration as an accomplished fact? I have never been able to make up my mind on this point, and still feel the necessity of having a more or less decided opinion in my teaching. There are many among us who hold to a much laxer theory and make baptism little more than a symbolic offer of the covenant on God's side, a presentation of the gospel isntead of a seal of the gospel promise. It seems to me that Dr. Kuyper approaches more or less to the Lutheran view of baptismal grace, though of course with the necessary restrictions.

2 comments:

Patrick said...

You might be interested in William Young's article which you can find here:

http://members.aol.com/RSIGRACE/neo1.html

Sean Lucas said...

Thanks, Patrick! I had read this a couple of years ago when I was doing research on the topic. I think Young's perspective on Kuyperian "hyper-covenantalism" is fairly persuasive.