Calvin’s early view of baptism

Posted on | November 20, 2009 | No Comments

In his early writings, Calvin shared the early apophatic tendencies of his fellow reformers in Zurich and Strasbourg. While the essential rite remained even within the Roman ritual, Calvin stressed the necessity to “free the rite from the elaborate anointing with oil and chrism, the consecration of the font, and the repeated exorcisms… so that the full force of the baptismal sign of washing might appear in all simplicity and directness.”

At the same time, Calvin’s theology of baptism centered on the Augustinian paradigm of the outward sign and the spiritual promise contained therein. Following in the wake of the first reforms of Zurich and Strasbourg, Calvin tends to side with Bucer’s emphasis on the promise and confirmation given in baptism – that is, baptism as a sort of dramatic representation of the Spirit’s inner work. There is a notable absence of Zwinglian language in Calvin’s earlier definitions of the sacraments. As John Riggs points out, the earlier editions of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion do not contain a notion of baptism as a human (ecclesial) pledge. Rather, baptism is the “true sign” of an inner reality. Bryan Spinks argues that an implicit critique of Zwingli resides in Calvin’s polemic against those who “dared to write that baptism is nothing but a token and mark by which we confess our religion before men, as soldiers bear the insignia of their commander as a mark of their profession.”

All these early reforms were animated to varying degrees by the Augustinian paradigm. However, as long as Rome remained the primary rival, the theological emphasis was on the inner reality, rather than the outward sign. This is true of Bucer in the 1520s, and doubly true of Zwingli – who frees the outward pledge from any causal connection with the inner grace. The rise of the Anabaptist party would alter the terms of the debate. While Zwingli’s views remained generally consistent (with the exception of the hardening of his position on infant baptism) , Bucer’s theology of baptism would be significantly altered in order to defend against the new attacks on the unity of the inner reality and outward sign. Calvin’s theology would also adapt to the new rival theology, but in a slightly different direction. Rather than return to an emphasis on the objectivity of the rite, Calvin would develop his theology of the visible church, and in doing so, adopt some of the Zwinglian language he had formerly disavowed.

Comments

Leave a Reply





About

Theopolitical is the weblog of Davey Henreckson, a graduate student of theology at the University of Notre Dame. Topics of conversation are political and historical theology, with semi-frequent forays into literature, economics, localism, and the divine American sport -- baseball.

Subscribe to this blog

Search

Davey Henreckson's currently-reading book recommendations, reviews, favorite quotes, book clubs, book trivia, book lists

Categories

Admin