My good friend, Matt Bianco, quotes Cyprian on the relationship between infants and the Eucharist in the Early Church. According to Matt, what is interesting is that paedocommunion “(was) the practice of the Church as far back as at least the third century, likely earlier since Cyprian makes no attempt to defend the practice, but rather assumes it as the norm.”
The Mode of Baptism
Little time is spent discussing the mode of baptism these days. Debates on the recipients of baptism abound, but once that question is solved, how then shall we baptize? With water, of course. In what way then is it administered? Paedobaptists have historically poured or sprinkled. The Westminster Confession states that pouring and sprinkling are the right ways of administering baptism. That the Divines dedicated a section of the Confession to the mode of baptism indicates that it was an important element within Presbyterian/Reformational early history.
As a pastor of a Reformed congregation who has poured water over the heads of 11 people in these last four years I am fully convinced that pouring is the ordained manner for recipients of baptism, whether young (infants) or old. However, to accommodate our baptist friends who have found Providence Church to be a place of joyful and faithful covenant living and who desire to become members of our body, we have made exceptions to such people who are not convinced of the biblical and historical merits of pouring (or sprinkling). These exceptions are rare, but they are provided.
About ten years ago as I considered the baptism issue for the first time I was handed a little book by Jay Adams entitled The Meaning and Mode of Baptism. In those 60 pages, Adams provided a convincing exegetical and historical argument in favor of pouring or sprinkling as proper modes of baptism. Adams argued rather strongly that immersion is not an appropriate mode. In a footnote (pg. 6), he relates his experiences in talking with immersionists. According to Adams, immersionists assume that pouring or sprinkling is merely a tradition’s carry-over, and thus not rooted in the study of Scriptures. Adams expresses his utter shock at their quick dismissal. He then proceeds to offer a biblio-theological case for pouring. He writes:
…In discussing the question biblically, immersionists seems unprepared for this sort of discussion as though they never expected anyone to argue for sprinkling from the Scripture.
This leads Adams to conclude that “immersion is propagated as a biblical mode more by repetition and assertion than from conviction stemming from careful Bible study (5).”
The study itself–as Adams and others demonstrate–includes a lot of assumptions which when challenged prove to not be a threat at all to the argument for pouring. Incidentally, James B. Jordan has also added his contributions on the exclusivity of pouring from a typological perspective. When one connects the typological evidence (as an example, the pouring of the Spirit of God upon the people at Pentecost) and the exegetical evidence (as an example, Isaiah 52:15, which promises a day when God shall sprinkle his people), it is reasonable then to grant pouring or sprinkling as legitimate and biblical modes of baptism.
The Meeting of Nevin and Schaff
The meeting of Nevin and Schaff was like the concurrence of two heavenly bodies of the first magnitude. The splendor which ensued is known as the Mercersburg Theology, for these two intellectual giants of Presbyterian-Reformed household of faith wrought out a theological system of singular boldness, relevant to its time distinctively ecumenical, and of unquestioned enduring worth.
Incarnation and Sacrament
Keith Mathison summarizes Calvin’s view of the Eucharist in his foreword to Jonathan Bonomo Incarnation and Sacrament. Mathison argues that Calvin followed Augustine in defining a sacrament as a “visible sign of a sacred thing.” For Calvin,
…the sacraments seal the promises found in the Word. The sacrament of the Lord’s Supper specifically seals the promise that those who partake of the bread and wine by faith truly partake of the body and blood of Christ.
Communion Meditation: Food as Proof of God’s Love
Note: Incidentally, this is also a subtle proof for weekly communion.
Food reveals the nature of God. God is a God of abundance. He is a provider. But food also reveals the nature of man. Even the smallest infant knows instinctively that food is life, and the creation account shows that even unfallen Adam had to eat. The Lord’s Table is a continual reminder that we are a needy people. Were we not needy, God would rarely if ever provide this table for us, but since we are needy, He provides it weekly, and we partake of it gladly.
{For further study, see Leithart’s article Love Made Food in Blessed are the Hungry}
Heavenly Fellowship and the Pursuit of Life, Liberty, and Happiness
This is a great day for these United States. It is a time of joy and celebration. And we hope to bathe ourselves with one of America’s greatest inventions: hot dogs. But beyond all the fireworks, parades, and the good and healthy national festivities, we will also remember that in 1776, the Declaration of Independence was approved by the Continental Congress, setting the 13 colonies on the road to freedom as a sovereign nation. Sovereignty is good. It is right. And I believe there was much wisdom in that threefold pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness. Undoubtedly we have not followed those principles too well in this nation. We have despised life by disposing of unborn infants, we have forgotten that God has set us free from ourselves and from the tyranny of sin, and we have also forsaken the liberty given to any nation whose God is the Lord. Therefore, we receive the just punishment we deserve, and that means the majority of our politicians and their policies. Washington has become a place of secret handshakes, unwarranted transactions, political elitism, sophist rhetoric, and cowardice. And finally, the happiness that we should certainly pursue is largely devoid of any form of Trinitarian rationale. Happiness–which is the pursuit of righteousness– without Nature’s God is temporary and unsatisfying.
We are first and foremost heavenly citizens. Our fellowship is heavenly. Our pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness are not granted by this nation, but by a heavenly nation that this country has largely ignored. But this should not be the case. We are not pessimists. We know that even in the darkest moment of this country’s history, God is still on the throne, and He did not hit the pause button on his kingdom advance.
People of God, be good citizens of this nation. Sing Psalms so loudly that the enemies will think there is an army of giants coming at them. Speak truth so firmly that Washington will be unable to shut her ears. Stand strong that nothing will deter you from marching on. Love so convincingly that godly marriage would be honored. Obey the Lord your God, petition his mercy that God would spare us as He did Nineveh.
True patriotism rejoices when our country does right, and weeps when she chases after false gods.
Let us come together this coming Lord’s Day through the holy act of worship, and purify the Bride of Christ with confession and rejoicing, for in this manner this nation will find life, liberty, and true happiness.
Christ is not annexed
My good friend, Toby Sumpter, writes concisely about the relationship between Christ and other means:
Jesus is not annexed by any of His gifts. He can and does meet His people in those places, but apart from the powerful working of the Spirit making a man new, the gifts of God are just a bunch of hay and dirt in the dark.
Mercersburg Theology with Brad Littlejohn
Mercersburg Theology with Brad Littlejohn
Mercersburg Theology: DownloadPodcast: Play in new window | Download
Some Praise for Charles Hodge
Mark Noll writes in the foreword:
The debate on the proper understanding of the Lord’s Supper that Nevin carried on with his former teacher, Charles Hodge of Princeton Theological Seminary, is one example of high-level theological reasoning on both sides. If, in my opinion, Nevin was the clear winner in that debate, Hodge did much better in some of his other engagements, as on Christianity as a way of life, on the meaning of baptism as an ecumenical Christian rite, or on the necessity of an Augustinian view of human nature.
Mercersberg Theology Summarized
Brad Littlejohn offers this concise definition:
…but if we may attempt to capture it in a nutshell, we might describe it thus: the Mercersburg Theology was a distinctively American yet cosmopolitan nineteenth-century theology— catholic, sacramental, both modern and ancient, Romantic and Reformed. Its eclecticism and historical awareness in an age of rigid orthodoxies, its ecumenism in an age of confessional quarrels, its theological seriousness and lofty speculation in an
American landscape dominated by anti-intellectualism, set it apart from the crowd of competing American theologies.{Series Introduction}