An excellent booklet covering two evangelical views about Baptism.

The first, a reprint of a chapter John Stott wrote in 1964, doesn't focus on infant baptism itself, but instead simply and clearly shows us what baptism really is. He rejects the "ex opera operato" view (that baptism is effective whether the recipient has any belief or faith or not) as "cutting the nerve of evangelism", the "bare token" view (that nothing happens at all), and then expounds what he calls the "Covenant Sign" view.

This, which he also describes as being the Evangelical and Reformed view is certainly a more subtle one, and a very Anglican middle way between the alternatives. This view is that the ceremony doesn't confer the grace it signifies, but rather gives a 'title' to it, which is then claimed or made operative by that person's faith. It allows both for saving faith to arrive both before and after a baptism ceremony, even if separated by many years. This, of course, helps us with the infant baptism question, as well as for adults who come to faith before their baptism. He also shows how it is consonant with Scripture, the Thirty-Nine Articles, and the Book of Common Prayer. And shows why this understanding is so important: "People need to be warned, for the good of their soul, that the reception of the sign, although it entitled them to the gift, does not confer the gift on them. They need to be taught the indispensable necessity of personal repentance and faith if they are to receive the thing signified."

The second part is by Alex Motyer, from a lecture in 1962 on "Baptism in the Book of Common Prayer". He covers the "Unity of Baptism and the Lord's Supper in One Identical Sacramental Principle", "The Association between Regeneration and Baptism", and "The Identity of Meaning between Adult and Infant Baptism". Through this he weaves together the various OT and NT texts, showing that in baptism we are seeing the fulfilment of circumcision for the Jews, and that the external outward signs even in the OT were never the operative part of the sacrament. He agrees with Stott in different language that "the power [of the sacrament] belongs to God and not to the sign".

The style of writing, particularly from Motyer, now feels dated. So I'm inclined to agree with Lee Gattiss' preface that someone of this generation needs to write an equivalent, that better harmonises the two author's different approaches. And tackles some newer questions that today's society throws up, particularly those non-churchgoers wanting their children baptised. Motyer by implication excludes this, and Stott is silent. We need this, and other circumstances, addressed more directly. ( )