It was a great privilege to preach at Worthing Tabernacle last Sunday. They love Jesus and love His word. And they graciously allowed an Anglican to preach to them on how "baptism saves you" (1 Peter 3:8-22) and on "Mary, the Mother of God" (Luke 1:39-56).
Those weren't really my titles. In the morning I spoke about the "U-shaped" life - the life of cross and resurrection that we've been given in Christ. Then in the evening I spoke of the revolution in our views of God, grace and glory that Jesus brings.
The U-Shaped Life - 1 Peter 3:8-22
.
The God, Grace and Glory of Jesus - Luke 1:39-56
In lieu of the Baptism saves sermon...
What you're saying is something like Baptism is the visible word that, mightily, says "Jesus is Lord, died for forgiveness of sins, risen forevermore"? I believe that in one sense, baptism saves ("washings of regeneration"), but not in a Roman 'ex opere operato' sort of way. But I'm never really sure how to talk about it. Especially in light of christendom fusion of culture and church.
The Waldenses would rebaptize, but also rebaptize their children, because they thought the Roman rites were anti-christ and contrary to the gospel. Some anabaptists had similar convictions, and even someone like Bunyan was a not-quite-baptist.
Not sure how to phrase what it is I think. Is the above a donatist, perfectionist response? Is there validity to rejecting a false baptism? I was baptized as an infant, but wasn't raised or instructed as a Christian (I didn't trust in Jesus as Lord) But then rebaptized when I converted at 18. So I get confused when trying to think it through.
Any thoughts?
Cal
Two quick thoughts that might help...
1) The sacraments are 'proclamation' (cf 1 Cor 11:26 and Augustine's "visible words"). They preach to the recipient. And as preaching is effectual in those who receive the Christ conveyed in it (and even effectual in those who don't!) then preaching - as well as the sacraments - can be said to do what Christ does, i.e. save. Never without faith, since faith is receiving the promise of Christ - so never ex opere operato. But they are effective words, even if sometimes they prove effective in hardening/judging (since not combined with faith).
2) Promises can precede the reception of those promises - and in some circumstances better reflect the gospel if they do. So circumcision is a sign of justification by faith (Rom 4) even though given to 8 day olds. Those children are meant to grow up under the sign and own the reality of the outward sacrament. They are meant to be circumcised of heart as well as circumcised physically. But the promise comes first and the child's inner world is meant to catch up.