# Andy Webb on the Reformers view of baptism



## Poimen (Oct 9, 2005)

I would be interested to know what my fellow paedobaptists think of Webb's treatment of Calvin and Ursinus in this essay (especially those who are Presumptive-Regenerationists):

http://tinyurl.com/734mq


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Oct 9, 2005)

I think Andy has done a great job in this paper, overall. I was present at the occasion he meant to give it (but cannot for my life remember why he didn't or couldn't).

I think what he says about the misreading of Calvin and Ursinus is correct, and that their words lend themselves, under a certain reading, to a false interpretation. We owe those men to comprehend the nature of their _main debate_ in the days in which they write being in contradiction to Romanist baptismal regeneration. What the later Puritans express 100 years after is the more careful language of defining not only what we believe against the papists, but also errors in other directions, including the Protestant formulations of Lutheranism and Anglo-catholicism.

So, the argument goes: what would Calvin and Ursinus be saying if asked to clarify their meaning? Or to put it another way, who are the true intellecutal and spiritual heirs of Calvin and company? Its the stream that runs through the Puritans (like Watson and Guthrie) and the confessional Presbyterians/Reformed. And yes, I certainly don't mind standing a little closer to the reformed Baptist here than to the sacramentarians, because these Baptists happen to be standing closer to us and closer to the Reformers than the other crowd.


----------

