Westminster Larger Catechism - Q 165

Status
Not open for further replies.

msortwell

Puritan Board Freshman
Would someone please explain what is meant by the following element of the response to Question 165 in the WLC?

Question 165 - What is Baptism?

Answer - Baptism is a sacrament . . . whereby the parties baptized . . . enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.​

It is likely obvious that I am most interested in what is meant by the term "professed engagement" within the context of the baptism of infants.

Thanks
 
Would it not be the parents profession made for the child in the light of the covenant promise, that God would be a God unto them and their children. Acting as surrogates until the child itself makes open profession. May not the analogy hold to a degree, that as Adam was covenant head of all he represented from his loins, so the father stands for his children from his loins until they are of riper years to profess. This of course is only a similitude and would not parallel the consequences of Adam's fall.
 
The language highlights the seriousness of baptism. In the case of infants, parents are willfully and knowledgably (we should hope!) entering their child into this public engagement to be the Lord's. We'd say the substance of the statement is no different today than it was in Abraham's day, regarding Abraham's seed.

A common failing respecting baptism is the tendency to relegate the whole business to the moment of its administration. That simply marks the moment of entrance into public engagement; it does not exhaust the testimony of baptism. When I (who was baptized as an infant) say today, "I have an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's," I am referring to my baptism.

"I am baptized," means just what the Catechism states. Next time you hear someone flippantly or defiantly or insouciantly making such a claim, ponder a moment on what they (perhaps ignorantly) are actually saying. Consider how every idle word will be judged. Consider that those expected to know more will be judged with greater severity.

"I've been baptized," is a statement of past reference. It isn't a bad statement, but often that's the only reference. When is the last time you heard it said in your circles, "I am baptized?" That's a statement of existential import. It doesn't belong to the sacerdotalists. Among the Protestants today, you hear it probably most among the Lutherans. But I suspect the Reformed and Presbyterians used to say it more often.

When I was born, I suppose my parents were happy to acknowledge to anyone who cared: they just brought into the world an "U.S. citizen." They made sure they obtained a notarized copy of my birth certificate. They basically engaged me to be a proud member of this republic. Then, they reared and catechized me to be such. So much so, that eventually I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. I didn't have to take that step to be a dedicated, loyal citizen; but in doing so, I made no half-measure of my commitment.

But the day I became a second-lieutenant, or before when I signed what was basically an enlistment contract as a cadet, I did not become a citizen on that day. On the day I was born it was my privilege to be publicly owned as such. And the notarized birth certificate made it a public record. So, what crime is it, if a one-time child (like my own case) takes a different tack from mine, and takes an oath to bring down the government? Or joins a gang, making that his "nation?" Is he a traitor? Just because of mom and dad? What right did they have to make him a citizen? When he was old enough, he made his own decision, right?

Well, the only substantive consideration is: was he legally an U.S. citizen? What parts of his life growing up depended on the good graces of this country's people, it's laws, it's social structure? If he's Amish, maybe there's an argument there that he's more like a Native American. The relation is a little different, for some reason. Otherwise, it's sophistry to say he's not fully subject to the expectations of good citizenship. And turning one's back on genuine blessings provided him without prior demands made on him is his rejection of the original "open profession" evidenced by his notarized birth certificate.

What do you tell a little Sunday School Christian? How about something like, "You are baptized, my child, and you have privileges and duties that such a thing has laid on you. What you do with your baptism is a serious thing."

http://files.puritanboard.com/confessions/wlc.htm
Q. 167. How is our baptism to be improved by us?
A. The needful but much neglected duty of improving our baptism, is to be performed by us all our life long, especially in the time of temptation, and when we are present at the administration of it to others; by serious and thankful consideration of the nature of it, and of the ends for which Christ instituted it, the privileges and benefits conferred and sealed thereby, and our solemn vow made therein; by being humbled for our sinful defilement, our falling short of, and walking contrary to, the grace of baptism, and our engagements; by growing up to assurance of pardon of sin, and of all other blessings sealed to us in that sacrament; by drawing strength from the death and resurrection of Christ, into whom we are baptized, for the mortifying of sin, and quickening of grace; and by endeavoring to live by faith, to have our conversation in holiness and righteousness, as those that have therein given up their names to Christ; and to walk in brotherly love, as being baptized by the same Spirit into one body.​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top