Opbouw, Vol. 8, No. 48 (19 March 1965), pp. 384-385
Translated by Jim Witteveen from the works of Gerard Visee.
“Mute” Actions
I am thinking of the many remarkable commands which the LORD at times gave to the prophets. They occur especially in the prophetic ministry of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. To mention only one example among many: In Ezekiel 24:16ff., the LORD tells Ezekiel that, through a sudden illness, He will take away his wife, “the delight of your eyes.” But the LORD forbids the prophet to give any outward expression to his grief: no mourning for the dead, no tears! No sign of sorrow, even though his heart should be breaking.
The following evening Ezekiel’s wife dies. The next morning the prophet does exactly as the LORD had commanded him. And this strange conduct of the man of God then prompts the people to ask: “Will you not tell us what these things mean for us, that you act in this way?” To which Ezekiel then gives the explanation. It is evident that, by means of such a wordless action, the LORD captures people’s attention, arouses their curiosity, and in this way prepares the way for instruction by the spoken word.
“Mute” Signs
Joshua does no differently when, on the western bank of the Jordan, at the place where Israel crossed the river, he has twelve stones piled up: “When your children later ask, ‘What do these stones mean to you?’ then you shall tell them that the waters of the Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed through the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan were cut off. Therefore these stones shall be a memorial forever for the Israelites” (Joshua 4:4–7). Here again the “mute” sign is intended to provoke questions.
The Sacraments
The question is whether, in our celebration of the sacraments,[i] we take this sufficiently into account. Among us, baptism and the Lord’s Supper are introduced by the reading of beautiful liturgical forms. But the question is whether, despite every good intention—and intentions that are especially understandable in light of history—the attention is not diverted too much from seeing and observing the sign itself.
For example, when the Lord Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper, He first broke the bread, distributed it, and only afterward explained to His disciples—whose attention had undoubtedly been arrested by this unusual action—what it meant. He did exactly the same with the second sign. He took the cup and gave it to them, and only afterward explained its meaning. And this is likewise how the LORD intended things to proceed at the Passover.
First came the preparations: slaughtering and roasting the lamb, baking the unleavened bread, removing the leaven from the house, preparing the table, taking one’s place at it, and beginning the meal. All these preparations naturally would attract the attention of the children in Israel, and when the meal was underway—or even already during the preparations—the question would arise: “What is this?” Such a question, prompted by these “mute” actions, is for the father an indication that “the age required for instruction has been reached” (Calvin), and that “the awakening of the spiritual life” (Lange–Gispen) has begun, that—to use the language of the Baptismal Form—the children have “come to years of understanding.”
Having Come to Years of Understanding
That is the moment at which the instruction of the children must begin. Then our children must deliberately be told the history of God’s mighty acts. Then they must learn the three chief parts of the doctrine of Christ: faith, the commandment, and prayer—that is, the Apostles’ Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Lord’s Prayer. Then also the instruction in the “aforesaid doctrine,” of which the Baptismal Form speaks, comes into view. Then our children must learn to understand the meaning of their baptism—what it means that they have been baptized.
They must learn this in a practical way. They must learn what God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit promise us in baptism, and that they must now love and fear the LORD. They must learn—and be trained—to make use of the baptism which they received without their knowledge. Children ought to become familiar with this from an early age. For this it is certainly unnecessary—and only a hindrance—to undertake first the attempt, doomed beforehand to failure, of initiating children into the mysteries of all kinds of sacramental and baptismal theories: the Roman Catholic, the Lutheran, the Anabaptist, the “Kuyperian,” and whatever others there may be.
The child should be given what belongs to childhood, and the continuing instruction of the children should keep pace with their continued “coming to years of understanding.” They should be taught the first principles, the ABCs, of baptism. Indeed, it is questionable whether familiarity with all kinds of erroneous views concerning the covenant and baptism is particularly profitable, even for adults, in understanding baptism. It is often burdensome baggage.
Concerning the people in the church at Thyatira who boasted that they knew “the deep things of Satan” (Rev. 2:24), Klaas Schilder once remarked that, according to Christ’s own words, it is not necessary to know the depths of Satan in order to understand the depths of God. Take note—this as a warning against misunderstanding!—of the comparison. I do not mean to say that the views just mentioned are simply “the depths of Satan,” although Satan certainly has something to do with all our errors. But neither should we act as though, in order to understand and adore the free grace of the electing God, we must first possess an exact knowledge of Pelagian, Semi-Pelagian, and Remonstrant theology concerning election and free will.
Our children, according to their age and ability—and in this also they must “grow and increase in the Lord Jesus Christ”—must learn to understand what it means to be a baptized child, to have been baptized. Above all, we must not forget that the act of baptism itself is also a means of instruction.
Baptism as a Means of Instruction
It seems to me that it is all too often forgotten that baptism—and by this I mean the act of baptizing, the baptismal action itself—is a means of instruction. And yet the confessional standards of the Reformed churches draw attention to this very emphatically. We have already shown from Scripture that these actions and signs are given as means of instruction. But the confessions do the same.
One need only think of the definition of the sacraments in Lord’s Day 25, Question and Answer 66, of the Heidelberg Catechism: that through the use of the sacraments God desires to make us understand the promise of the gospel even more fully and to seal it to us. Or Answer 67: that the Holy Spirit teaches us in the gospel and assures us through the sacraments—that is, confirms that teaching—that our entire salvation rests upon the one sacrifice of Christ. Or Answer 69: “How are you admonished” (that is, instructed, or reminded) “and assured in holy baptism that the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross benefits you?”
The Belgic Confession speaks in the same way. Article 33 speaks of the sacraments, “which God has added to the Word of the gospel, in order to represent more clearly to our outward senses both what He makes us understand by His Word and what He inwardly works in our hearts, thereby confirming in us the salvation which He communicates to us.” Article 34 speaks of that which the LORD makes us understand through baptism. Precisely because baptism is a means of instruction, and indeed for the whole congregation, the Reformed have always administered baptism “in the public assembly when God’s Word is preached,” as Article 56 of the Church Order expresses it.
No baptism in the baptistery, as in the Roman Church, where only the godfather and godmother play a role. No private baptism in the home, as in Lutheran countries, where only the parents and relatives are present. Rather, baptism in the assembly of God’s people—where the children are also present. So that, as the Reformed Baptismal Form says, baptism may be administered “to the honor of God, to our comfort, and to the edification”—that is, the building up—“of the congregation” in the faith.
And the children belong to that congregation—not only the “professing members,” but all of them. The children too. They too are to be addressed by baptism. They too are to be prompted to ask questions: “Have I also been baptized?” “Why was I baptized?” It is good to pay attention to this aspect of the baptismal act, because baptism is intended to teach the congregation, both young and old. And in this it becomes evident that this sacrament is not a magical instrument that accomplishes its work without being understood. It stimulates questions, and answers. It calls for understanding, even though the message of the sacrament “surpasses the boldest understanding.”
(To be continued).
- Visee
[i] I am gradually beginning to have reservations about the word sacrament, which, moreover, does not occur in Scripture. But I shall let that matter rest for the present.
