Covenantal Credobaptism
I mentioned in my recent series “Can Baptists be Reformed?” that many Baptists, including many Calvinistic Baptists, reject covenant theology because they view it as incompatible with credobaptism (see here, here, and here). But a number of Reformed Baptists, both of the formal and informal kind, have argued otherwise. In fact, many Baptists argue that credobaptism is more consistent with covenant theology than pedobaptism.
The most accessible introduction to this topic was written by my new Southeastern Seminary colleague Greg Welty. It is titled “A Critical Evaluation of Paedobaptism” and is available both online and as a booklet. Stan Reeves also has a helpful webpage titled “FAQ on the Reformed Baptist View of Baptism.”
The most important work on this topic, though one influenced in some ways by neo-orthodoxy, is Paul Jewett’s Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace (Eerdmans, 1978). Two other helpful books on this topic have been written by Southern Baptist pastor-theologians. See Fred Malone’s The Baptism of Disciples Alone: A Covenantal Argument for Credobaptism Versus Paedobaptism, rev. and expanded ed. (Founders Press, 2008), and Brian Russell, Baptism: Sign and Seal of the Covenant of Grace (Banner of Truth, 2002); the latter is currently out-of-print but can be purchased used from several different websites. A more succinct and popular version of Malone’s arguments are available on the Founder’s website under the title A String of Pearls Unstrung: A Theological Journey into Believer’s Baptism.
There are some other resources that I’ve never read. David Kingdon’s out-of-print Children of Abraham: A Reformed Baptist View of Baptism, the Covenant, and Children (Carey Press, 1973) is considered a classic work on this topic. Reformed Baptist Academic Press has published at least two recent books on this topic: Alan Conner’s Covenant Children Today: Physical or Spiritual? and a new book by Gary Crampton titled From Paedobaptism to Credobaptism.
For the truly intrepid, there are some older treatments of this topic. See Nehemiah Coxe’s Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ (reprinted by Reformed Baptist Academic Press), R. B. C. Howell’s The Covenants (available online through Founders Ministries), and John Tombes’ A Short Catechism about Baptism (1659).
As a related aside, In my series on Reformed Baptists I mentioned the theological system called New Covenant Theology. My friend Benji Ramsaur is one of the most able proponents of this view that I’ve met among Southern Baptists. He recently wrote a post titled “What in the World is New Covenant Theology?” for SBC Impact. Benji would differ with all of the above-mentioned resources and would tell you the best treatment of covenant and baptism is Steve Wellum’s chapter “Baptism and the Relationship between the Covenants” in Believer’s Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ (B&H Academic, 2006).
8 Responses to “Covenantal Credobaptism”
Leave a Reply
Nathan A. Finn serves as Associate Professor of Historical Theology and Baptist Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina. He's a husband, father, elder, baseball enthusiast, and Broadway musical fan. He's still trying to figure out why we drive on parkways and park on driveways.
Another excellent resource is Matt Waymeyer’s _A Biblical Critique of Infant Baptism_ (Kress Christian Pub., 2008).
http://www.amazon.com/Biblical-Critique-Infant-Baptism/dp/097722628X
FWIW, here’s my endorsement (excerpted on the back of the book):
“While finishing up my studies at Westminster Seminary, I wrote a little pamphlet critiquing infant baptism, and in the following years I had many Christian friends urge me to expand that material into a book. I’m happy to say that Pastor Matt Waymeyer has produced a treatment of the subject that far excels any that I could have written. Even after debating the issue for over ten years with my paedobaptist brethren, I found Waymeyer’s book to be a rich resource of new insights into the discussion. Overreaching paedobaptist claims are persistently examined in the light of safe and sane biblical exegesis.
Of particular note is his careful attention to the grammar, syntax, context, and original languages of the typical pericopae cited by paedobaptists. And rather than forcing the reader to depend on tendentious summaries of the positions to be assessed, he simply provides abundant quotation of leading paedobaptist authors (with a particular focus on recent entrants into the debate), and lets them speak for themselves. Because Waymeyer also distills the best of recent baptist thought on the subject, his book is a “Who’s Who” of recent writers in the debate over infant baptism.
Waymeyer is well-aware that no one of his particular considerations can bear the whole weight of the case against infant baptism, but his cumulative case is a good one. It is no trivial task to avoid stridency of tone while combining simplicity of presentation with precision in argument, but that is what this book accomplishes. I highly recommend this volume to any pastor, seminary student, or interested layman who is studying this subject.”
Thanks for the link, Greg.
Nathan,
As you note, Paul King Jewett’s book continues to be cited after all these years and despite his neo-orthodoxy and other issues. I think at least some of the book’s enduring appeal has to do with the considerable rhetorical skill that he brought to the table.
To respond to Dr. Welty’s comment, I have heard good things about Matt Waymeyer’s book, but I haven’t read it myself. Matt Waymeyer is a dispensationalist, and not a covenant theologian. As a graduate of the Masters Seminary, he would be in the MacArthur mold that you note in another post. Whether this is reflected in his book or not, I can’t say. That being said, that Dr. Welty endorses it is high praise indeed.
Another book that I’m slowly working my way through is Jeffrey D. Johnson’s “The Fatal Flaw of the Theology Behind Infant Baptism.” This recent publication carries the endorsement of Dr. Tom Nettles and Richard Belcher, as well as the Presbyterian Thomas Gentry, who supervised the thesis on which the book is based. If I had to pick a camp, I’d be closer to Waymeyer, but perhaps Johnson can persuade me otherwise.
Bro. Johnson takes more of a covenantal approach, although I don’t think he has a Puritan view of the Lord’s Day. For that matter, many PCA elders don’t agree with the Westminster Standards on that issue either. Hardly any (and I’m tempted to say none) of the YR&R crowd do. I’m not sure that you can really be restless while being a covenantal confessional Reformed Baptist.
Chris,
Thanks for the additional book recommendation. I have also observed that Reformed pedobaptists seem to be more open to alternatives to the Puritan view of the Lord’s Day than Reformed Baptists. I’m not sure why that’s the case. I’m not sure I understand what you mean in your last statement about Reformed Baptists not being very restless.
Nathan,
My apologies–the restless comment was sort of offhand and not very clear. It was basically an observation that from what I’ve seen, the New Calvinism generally doesn’t place much emphasis on historic confessions, the regulative principle of worship and similar things that confessional Reformed Baptists of the ARBCA type would tend to emphasize.
With regard to openness to different views on the Lord’s Day, I think it reflects the fact that the PCA doesn’t require strict subscription to the Westminster Standards and as a whole is more broadly evangelical in outlook, while continuing to emphasize what they consider to be the essentials of their system of doctrine. On the other hand, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and other Presbyterian and Reformed denominations who are more self-consciously Reformed tend to take a much harder line on issues like the Puritan view of the 4th commandment. This also tends to include the Puritan view of the 2nd commandment that all depictions of Christ are prohibited. (Interestingly, I’ve seen a couple of recent books by SBC authors that appear to basically agree with that stance.)
I think a good analogy could be made that ARBCA is similar to the OPC in outlook, with an emphasis on issues like sabbatarianism and the RPW, whereas a group like the Fellowship of Independent Reformed Evangelicals (FIRE) is more like the PCA in that it allows for a lot more latitude on issues like sabbatarianism and in the case of FIRE, non-covenantal views like NCT and even dispensationalism.
I don’t want to get too far off the subject here, but I also see parallels with the “Truly Reformed” outlook among Reformed paedobaptists and what has come to be known in the blogosphere as Baptist Identity. Neither group would be very favorably disposed to the concept of theological triage as articulated by Dr. Mohler, since they both place a stronger emphasis on denominational distinctives and are less likely to cooperate across denominational lines.
Chris,
Not only do I concur with your observations, but have made similar connections in my own mind (but not in print). Very interesting.
IIRC, Waymeyer does not appeal to any distinctively dispensational theses to make his case.
Jim Newheiser was my pastor in San Diego when he started F.I.R.E in the late 1990′s. And I was a member of an ARBCA church in Ft. Worth for about four years. I have a wealth of sociological data on these corners of the Baptist world
Greg Welty knows too much for his own good.