St. Boniface House

Dear ones, we have the very great privilege of witnessing and participating in the baptism of our sister Laura this morning.  Normally we celebrate this event with our covenant children, but the fact that we are baptizing an adult does not make it any less a matter for celebration and joy.  Before we come to the actual baptism, I want to say a few words about baptism on this happy occasion, as is our custom.

First, I want to clear up what is sometimes a misconception even among Presbyterian folk such as ourselves, and that is the notion that we baptize our babies on the basis of God’s covenant promise, but that if, as in the case here before us today, someone should make it to adulthood without receiving the covenant sign and rite, we then shift to a version of “believer’s baptism”, in which the baptism is applied on the basis of the adult’s profession of faith and is an expression of it, and so on.  Of course it matters if Laura believes or not.  Elder Hale and I have had occasion to spend time with Laura over the last year, and we sat and visited with her last Saturday specifically with respect to her profession of faith.  We are convinced as much as we can be that she loves the Lord and that she desires to follow him with her whole life.  And there is a sense in which that is why she is receiving baptism today.  But with St. Paul we confess that “there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism”, and therefore it is not a stretch to say that “all baptism is infant baptism”.  The baptism of an adult means the same thing and does the same thing as does the baptism of an infant.  In the case of an infant, we conclude that baptism belongs to him or her because God’s covenant promises are not only for us, but for our children. And so we baptize him or her on the basis of God’s promises which are our reason for believing that the child covenantally belongs to God.  In the same way, we conclude that baptism belongs to an adult, that Laura is entitled to baptism, because she has professed faith in Jesus Christ, and therefore she is also an heir of the promises of God.  There is one baptism.  Therefore we would be mistaken if we concluded that unlike our infant baptisms, Laura is here today of her own accord to be baptized as a public expression of her faith.  Baptism for adults is every bit as passive as it is for infants.  The baptism we are about to behold is not an act of Laura, but an act of God.  In it everything that we believe and confess takes place in an infant baptism will take place for Laura.  Laura’s baptism means exactly the same thing as an infant baptism.  Laura is being initiated into the covenant community, the church.  She is united to Christ and his body.  God is making promises directly to Laura—that he will be her God and she will be his child, that he will care for and protect and provide for her, that he will wash away all her sins, redeem her from all evil, clothe her in the righteousness of his Son and pour out the Holy Spirit upon her, and will raise her from the dead in a glorious resurrection body with Christ Jesus and the whole church on the last day.  The response that is required of Laura is exactly the same as what is required of our covenant children:  she must believe all these promises.  She must trust and go on trusting the one who has so committed himself to her as to send his Son to die for her sins.  She must repent of all her sins, and then repent of them again, in her endeavor to walk in righteousness and holiness.  We believe in one baptism.

The second thing I want to highlight on this occasion is the fact that the adult that we are baptizing is a woman.  Here is a testimony of God’s grace and the richness of the Gospel that has come in Christ Jesus.  As you know, baptism, as an initiatory rite, replaces circumcision in the New Covenant.  Why?  A bunch of the New Testament is concerned with this fact, because there were folks who wanted to go on insisting that circumcision was necessary for membership in the covenant community, even after Christ has come.  But Paul and the other apostles adamantly maintain that it is not necessary, and that to claim that it is is to act as if Christ has never come. 

Why does baptism replace circumcision, then?  Let’s remember what circumcision meant and did.  Circumcision meant, in many ways, the same thing as baptism.  It was a sign of membership in the covenant community, a mark that set the recipient apart as an heir of the promises of God, the blessings of covenant citizenship, and the responsibilities of the family of God.  All this is just like baptism.  But circumcision was a bloody rite, and as such it was also a rite of judgment.  Circumcision, like the animal sacrifices highlighted what Paul calls “the weakness of the law” and the necessity of the shedding of blood for the remission of sin.  Circumcision promised blessing, but also judgment.  Circumcision, like the Tabernacle, also demonstrated how God kept his people at a distance from himself.  It was a sign of membership in God’s covenant people, but it was a sign that not every member of the covenant community could bear.  For obvious reasons, and the practice of some Muslims and some other pagans notwithstanding, circumcision is a sign that only men can bear.  The participation of women in the covenant community was severely limited.  A woman’s share in the blessings of the covenant was mediated by the priestly role of her father or husband, just as the Israelite layman’s share in the blessings of the covenant was mediated by the Levitical priesthood. 

So why baptism, then?  First of all, Jesus was circumcised and so fulfilled the meaning and intent of the bloody rite—not only in his circumcision when he was 8 days old in accordance with the law, but also and especially in his death on the cross.  When St. Paul refers to the circumcision of Christ in Colossians 2, he means his crucifixion.  Jesus not only bore the covenant sign, but he also bore the covenant curse to which the sign pointed.  This means that there is no longer any need for a bloody rite (and explains why the apostles were so concerned to deny that circumcision was necessary).  Jesus died for sins, once for all.  The God-man only needed to bear the curse of the fall once, and he did, and it will never be borne again by his people.

This also means that covenant participation is extended.  Circumcision was intended to set the Jews off from the Gentiles.  No longer, for the Kingdom of God in Christ Jesus is expanded to all nations, and therefore Baptism, a sign of union with Christ in his death and resurrection through the power of the Spirit is the sign of the covenant.  Circumcision, as we’ve seen, also kept women and girls at arms length.  But in baptism women are united to Christ just as men are.  Anyone can receive baptism, because the New Covenant is universal in its design.  And so the fact that we are baptizing this dear sister today is itself a testimony to the grace of God which has come to us in Christ Jesus.  Laura and every other baptized woman here has full access to the throne of grace through Jesus Christ, the same as every man.  She is a royal priest, who because of what our Great High Priest has done may offer herself as a living ascension offering to God, and may enter the heavenly Holy of Holies to eat a meal with our covenant King, together with the rest of his church.  That’s why baptism has replaced circumcision.