As a father and Reformed Christian, I can appreciate Leithart’s desire to tell his three year old child that he is justified by virtue of his baptism. Nevertheless, I do find his view problematic on several fronts.

The following is from page 246 of the Peter Leithart trial transcript:

Q: Right. So is there a way that you would distinguish the personal favor that regularly baptized members of the visible church enjoy, God’s personal favor, from the justification from which the elect can never fall away?

A: I certainly can, I certainly distinguish them. There’s, again, this goes back to the same kind of, same kind of distinctions I’ve made with some – – with some differences, I suppose. But same kinds of distinctions I’ve made about temporary benefits and temporary faith in other contexts. Again, the question I’m asking is what do we tell our children? That’s, that’s the way to summarize the question I’m trying to ask.

Can I tell my three year old child that they are right before God? And can I tell them that their baptism tells them that? That Jesus has claimed them, that they belong to him and he forgives their sins and he is, that the Father counts them as righteous because they belong to Jesus? I think I can and should tell them that.

And I think that hesitation to do that, I think is, is, is the problem. Does that mean that I know that that child is going to continue in that personal favor? No. You – – you can have children who are in that favor and fall away from that. And the people who don’t fall away, the children who grow up and don’t fall away, who persevere in faith by the – – by the power of the Spirit are those who have the justification that is given to the elect.

As a father and Reformed Christian, I can appreciate Leithart’s desire to tell his three year old child that he is justified by virtue of his baptism. Nevertheless, I do find his view problematic on several fronts.

First, he has to posit two qualitatively different kinds of justification in order to maintain the Reformed understanding of justification/salvation (i.e. a justified person cannot fall away from the state of justification, WCF 11.5). There is a justification that is given to the elect and a justification given to the non-elect. There are some then who are justified like Abraham and others who are justified like Judas. So what exactly are we saying to the three year old covenant child when we tell him that he is justified by virtue of his baptism? Are we saying without hesitation that he is justified like Abraham?

We can’t say that because we do not know if he has been given “the justification that is given to the elect.” At best, all we can say for sure is that he is justified like Judas. But I am not sure how pastorally helpful or reassuring this is.

Teacher: You are justified because you have been baptized.

Child: Does that mean that I am justified like Abraham?

Teacher: No, well, you might be. Or you might be justified like Judas. We just don’t know. But we do know that you are justified, and I do not hesitate to tell you that.

Child: Okay, thanks, I think.

Second, since there are qualitatively different kinds of justification, we have to ask the question, “What kind of justification does baptism signify and seal?” Does it signify the justification given to the elect, the justification given to the reprobate or both? If it only signifies and seals the justification given to the elect then we can’t say to every covenant child that they are justified by virtue of their baptism. If it only signifies the justification given to the reprobate then baptism doesn’t signify and seal true salvation.

If it signifies both, then how can there be only one baptism? Moreover, what is the exegetical case for baptism signifying and sealing two different kinds of justification?

Finally, baptism does not justify by virtue of it being administered. Baptism (like circumcision) signifies and seals the righteousness which a person receives by faith. Circumcision and Baptism are seals of salvation by faith. God’s promise sealed in baptism is salvation by faith and requires faith on our part. In other words, baptism is a seal of the covenant of grace and the covenant of grace requires faith. Covenant privileges entail covenant responsibilities. And assurance of the privileges cannot be isolated from our responsibilities.

Dabney: “[Sacraments] are seals of a covenant. That Covenant, as far as man is a party (and in the sacrament, the recipient is one party), was suspended on an instrumental condition, a penitent and obedient faith. How can the seal have a more immediate and absolute efficiency than the covenant of which it is a seal. That covenant gives it all its force.” ST, 741.

Murray: “The sign and seal of baptism can be no pledge or guarantee to us of that which baptism signifies except as we are mindful of God’s covenant, embrace its promises, discharge its obligations, and lay hold in faith upon the covenant faithfulness of God.”

Marcel: “The blessings of redemption are promised to [the child] on the same conditions as to his parents, for baptism effectively signifies, seals, and communicates its blessings to all, whether children or adults, who close with the covenant of which it is the seal. Just as a believer by recalling one or other promise of Scripture, which he has read or heard, receives to the full the promised blessings, so a child who has reached maturity receives all the blessings of baptism, if he believes in the promises signified and sealed for him in the sacrament administered. Consequently, baptism benefits children in exactly the same manner as adults and on the same conditions.” Infant Baptism, pg. 227.

Henry Krabbendam: “On the one hand, both the sacrament and the promise have complete integrity and efficacy. In them God gives himself in Christ. On the other hand, the exercise of human responsibility in terms of faith and repentance remains uncompromisingly necessary. The exhortations to faith and repentance underscore this. Only through the exercise of human responsibility, however much a grace of God, will the substance of the sacrament and promise be received. 100% sovereign grace does not impinge upon 100% human responsibility nor vice versa.” Class notes, pg. 114.

This then brings us back to the conversation with the three year old. Leithart asks: “Can I tell my three year old child that they are right before God? And can I tell them that their baptism tells them that? That Jesus has claimed them, that they belong to him and he forgives their sins and he is, that the Father counts them as righteous because they belong to Jesus?” You can tell him that Jesus has claimed him and that he belongs to Jesus. And you can tell him that Jesus forgives him of his sins and that the Father counts him as righteous AS LONG AS he believes and embraces the promises that God signified and sealed to him in his baptism.

Patrick Ramsey is pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church in London, KY, a congregation of the OPC. He received a B.A. from Covenant College, an M.Div. from Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and a Th.M. from Westminster Seminary. He blogs at Patrick’s Pensees where this article first appeared; it is used with permission.