msortwell
Puritan Board Freshman
Brothers,
The WCF - 28 makes the following statement, "Baptism is a sacrament . . . to be unto him [the one baptized] a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ . . ."
Is this intended to assert or otherwise imply, that:
The sacrament is not received (in the true sense) until such time (and only at such time) as the one baptized, upon reflection, accepts as truth that which is signified by the baptism - and only at such a time does the baptism function as a seal of the covenant of grace and all else that follows, as described in WCF-28. In such circumstances the sacrament would minister grace to the baptized.
Stated differently. If an infant is baptized with water, but that person, upon maturing, never accepts as truth that which is signified by the baptism, then that person has not received the sacrament, and in such a case, it never functions unto the baptized as a sign or seal? Under these circumstances (the baptized never accepting the truth of the thing signified) there would be no grace ministered to the baptized through the baptism.
I have intentionally left regeneration out of the discussion above. It seems obvious to me that the working of the Spirit will determine which set of circumstances described above plays out for any particular individual. But I am hoping to learn, more specifically, how we are to understand the workings of the sacrament upon the elect verses the reprobate.
Or is my entire line of thought askew?
The WCF - 28 makes the following statement, "Baptism is a sacrament . . . to be unto him [the one baptized] a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ . . ."
Is this intended to assert or otherwise imply, that:
The sacrament is not received (in the true sense) until such time (and only at such time) as the one baptized, upon reflection, accepts as truth that which is signified by the baptism - and only at such a time does the baptism function as a seal of the covenant of grace and all else that follows, as described in WCF-28. In such circumstances the sacrament would minister grace to the baptized.
Stated differently. If an infant is baptized with water, but that person, upon maturing, never accepts as truth that which is signified by the baptism, then that person has not received the sacrament, and in such a case, it never functions unto the baptized as a sign or seal? Under these circumstances (the baptized never accepting the truth of the thing signified) there would be no grace ministered to the baptized through the baptism.
I have intentionally left regeneration out of the discussion above. It seems obvious to me that the working of the Spirit will determine which set of circumstances described above plays out for any particular individual. But I am hoping to learn, more specifically, how we are to understand the workings of the sacrament upon the elect verses the reprobate.
Or is my entire line of thought askew?