NOTES OUT OF THE CATECHISM CLASSES Of Rev. J. Fraanje Using the Catechism Book

Of the Sacraments

Lesson 36 Part II

Which sacraments did the Lord Jesus establish in the place of circumcision and the passover?

Answer: Holy Baptism instead of circumcision and the Lord’s Supper instead of Passover.

When did He do this?

Answer: The Lord’s Supper on the night He celebrated the last Passover, and Baptism just prior to His ascension to heaven.

What words were used in His doing this?

Answer: He took up the bread and the cup saying, “Do this in remembrance of me.”

And what were they in Holy Baptism?

Answer: “Go forth, teaching all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.”

Hellenbroek now asks, “With what do we baptize?”

Answer: With water. Now, that is plain enough; but then he follows it with the question: Must this water be mixed with something else?

Answer: No, it must only be pure, unmixed water!

You would say, “That is simple enough; why is he making a special point of this?

Because Roman Catholics mix something with the water.

When I lived in Rotterdam a boy once came to my home and related all that had taken place in his life. Now, they were really pitiful things. His mother died early in life, and when his father remarried the man ceased providing for him. The boy finally left home, knowing he was not welcome anymore. He wandered around from one place to another. After having tried everywhere and failed, he finally, in dire need, went into the Roman Catholics at Maastricht. I was aware that his mother had reared him in the doctrines of scripture while she lived. He had been baptized and had knowledge of the scriptures. With that in mind I asked him, “My boy, how do you reconcile this with your orthodox confession? In the past when a Protestant became a Roman Catholic (according to what I have been told) he had to renounce our confession upon his knees, were you required to do that too?”

“No” said he, “They have discarded that practice, it is not longer required, but it is required to be baptized again.” I asked, “And how was that handled?” Then he related further, “First they investigated everything; where I was baptized and to which religion I really belonged. When they were fully informed, they brought me into a dark room, where I was required to kneel. Then a “father” with others like him stood around about me and the father or priest then spoke five Latin words and I had to say some that I did not understand. When that had taken place they poured water over my head and I was baptized. They used the same words we do, “I baptize thee in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.” I then asked them why I had been baptized again? Their answer being, “The Protestant baptism is done with too little water, they only sprinkle a few drops on the forehead but the water should flow. Also, there is no sacred spittle put in the baptismal water and for that reason the Protestant baptism has no merit and you have just now been really baptized.”

This boy told these things with tears. He could no longer continue with that religion but had to return to the orthodox belief wherein his mother had reared him.

The Roman Catholics believe in seven sacraments instead of two, namely; Baptism, Confirmation, The Lord’s Supper, Confession, Holy Unction, Priesthood and Marriage. We do not have the time to explain each of these. We shall continue with ours in the Truth and remain with the two sacraments Christ instituted.

Can we prove from God’s Word that pure water is sufficient for baptism?

O, yes, we read that John, while at the river, baptized all that came unto him. Now, that river water was not mixed with “holy spittle”. And Philip, with the Ethiopian descended into the water alongside which they were riding.

But God’s Word teaches baptism by immersion, you might reason, and not that sprinkling is the only way.

In the eastern countries this is possible, but in these cold countries this would be very objectionable, also in respect to modesty.

Would sprinkling be contrary to God’s Word?

No, because the New Testament repeatedly speaks of sprinkling. In Hebrews 12:24 it says, “And to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.” Also in the Old Testament in Ezekiel 36:25 - “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you.”

We see then that either a large amount or a small amount of water can be lawfully used.

If you had listened well you could have reasoned: The disciples were commissioned by Jesus to baptize after His death and resurrection. That was a divine mission, but, was John the Baptist’s baptism proper prior to Jesus death?

Would he have been sent by God?

Answer: Yes.

Well, well, you appear to have more courage than the Jewish Bible scholars of those days, because when Jesus asked them, ‘The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?” They answered Jesus, and said, “We cannot tell.” But it appears you do know. How do you substantiate your answer?

Answer: John said, “--He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, etc.” John 1:33.

And what others do you have?

Answer: John 1:6, “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.”

These are sufficient proofs but there is still another. According to the sending out of the twelve they were charged to baptize in the Name of the Triune God, but I read in Acts 8:16 that the disciples baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Was that proper for them?

It must not have been done as a regular thing, because it is stated often times, “And they were baptized in the name of the Lord.” The disciples probably took into account the fact that the Jews did believe in God the Father but not in Jesus the Savior and for that reason expressly baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus, in order to emphasize that He is true God with the Father.

Now there is another question, “May anyone baptize in an emergency?”

Answer: “No, only those who are sent to teach.” You would say what a strange question that man asks! The cause for this is to be found in Catholicism. They teach, that in time of an emergency, as, suppose a child is about to die, and it is too late to call a clergyman, anyone may baptize.

They contend that it is better a layman baptize than that one die unbaptized. I had been told that as the Egyptian midwives were ordered to drown the Hebrew baby boys, so must the Roman Catholic midwives promise they will baptize babies about to die when there is no time to bring them to the church.

I investigated this at the time and found the civil authorities and the courts of justice consent to the practice of Roman Catholic midwives or doctors baptizing new-born children, when it is evident that the child will not live long. What is their reason for doing this?

Of course it is because they err in the sacrament of Baptism just as badly as in the Lord’s Supper. In their catechism book for children they state:

Question 355: Who administers baptism?

Answer: It is usually performed by the priest, but in an emergency it may and must be baptized by anyone.

Question 359: What do we receive in baptism?

Answer: 1st. Forgiveness of original sin and those sins committed before baptism. 2nd. Acquittal of all punishment for those sins. 3rd. Sanctify ing grace and supernatural assistance to lead a Christian life.

Do you understand why they permit, yes, even command, that anyone baptize a child before it dies? They claim that baptism washes away original sin.

Calvin fought viciously against this in his time too, but in boldness openly dared to dispute then-wickedness and wrote: “Christ never commanded that women or all sorts of men should baptize,” but gave that command only to those whom He had chosen and sent out as apostles.

But now, if a child had been baptized by a Roman Catholic priest in the name of the Triune God, should their baptism be declared invalid and must that child be baptized again by a lawful minister? There have been differences of opinion about that point since the early centuries after Christ. Calvin in his “Institutes” states regarding that, “Against these absurdities we shall be sufficiently fortified if we reflect that by baptism we were initiated not into the name of any man but into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and therefore that baptism is not of man, but of God, by whomsoever it may be administered.”

As early as a synod held in Dordt in 1574, the question was raised, should a child who had been baptized by a midwife or doctor be baptized again in the church?

And the answer was, “Yes, since baptism by a midwife or layman is actually not baptism.” It is a great wickedness for anyone who has not a calling fo this to go forth in the Name of the Triune God. The so called, emergency baptism, therefore, is not lawful and a child so baptized must be baptized by one lawfully called.

A sacrament, even though administered by an unlawful minister is, none the less, a sacrament. Baptism in the Roman Catholic church, administered by an acknowledged office bearer and performed in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, has never been done over by our fathers.

Calvin goes on further to say: “It seems to me to be just the same as found in practical life where a farmer having a flock of sheep sells a few to a broker. When the purchase had been consumated the buyer usually places a mark on each one of the sheep which he has purchased. Now just suppose a naughty boy is present and has exactly the same kind of marker as the buyer and places his mark on various ones, what does the buyer do? He approaches the sheep saying, ‘This is a good one”, but sees a mark on it. This is all right; he doesn’t put a second on it, but says to the boy, “Will you please go away, that is my work, keep your hands off, understand?”

In this way (according to Calvin) the Lord shall deal with those who have never been sent out to do this, and yet baptized, preached or administered the Lord’s Supper.

Speaking in reverence, he would say, “I shall not consider these people as heathens by reason of their being baptized by you because they have, none the less, My seal upon their forehead. I shall punish you, however, for your wrong doing. You have performed something which was not yours to do. You have put your hands upon labor to which I call My chosen servants. It is them only I send out to instruct and baptize.”

Neither shall these people be lost because they were not baptized by a lawfully called minister but God will deal with such, and not hold them guiltless.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen