Second, the Calvinists
§ 431. (1) In
their words, the Calvinists confess along with us the perspicuity of Scripture.
Indeed, they battle for it against the Papists with entire chapters and books.
Yet if they keep their suppositions, they cannot keep from accusing Scripture
of obscurity in the most important articles of faith. The article on Baptism
and its efficacy is, as evident, one of the chief ones. Concerning it, the Calvinists
teach: “Baptism is not an effectual means of regeneration, forgiveness of sins,
and salvation, but is only a sign.” Nowhere in all Scripture, however, is Baptism
taught in proper, clear, and perspicuous words as merely a sign of
regeneration, that Baptism only signifies a washing away of sins. Rather Scripture
often speaks about the end and fruit of Baptism: “By Baptism we are cleaned of
our sins”; “We are generated of water”; “Baptism is the washing of regeneration
and renewal” (John 3:5; Eph. 5:27; Titus 3:5, etc.). Therefore, they are
compelled to claim that Scripture nowhere speaks about the efficacy and fruit
of Baptism in proper, clear, and perspicuous words, but only in figurative,
improper, and metonymic words Sohnius says in Method. Theolog., vol. 1, Oper.,
p. 262: “All propositions concerning the efficacy of Baptism that occur in
Scripture are figurative, improper, and metonymic except this one: ‘Baptism is
a type of the removal of dirt,’” which he says is in 1 Pet. 3:21. An inspection
of the text, however, clearly reveals the opposite. Ursinus, Comp., p.
503: “These are improper or figurative forms of speaking: ‘Baptism is the
washing of regeneration,’ ‘”Baptism saves us.’ The proper form of speaking is
that it is a sign of washing.” (But where does Scripture use this form of
speaking?) (Johann Gerhard, On the Nature of Theology and on Scripture [trans.
Richard J. Dinda; Saint Louis, Miss.: Concordia Publishing House, 2009], 388)
