Scots Confession (1560): “We Damn The Error Of The Anabaptists” For Refusing To Baptize The Children Of Believers

by on February 25, 2025 | 2 Comments

We confess and acknowledge that baptism appertains as well to the infants of the faithful as unto those that be of age and discretion. And so we damn the error of Anabaptists who deny baptism to appertain to children before they have faith and understanding. But the Supper of the Lord, we confess to appertain to such only as be of the household of faith, can try and examine themselves as well in their faith as in their duty towards their neighbors. Such as eat and drink at that holy table without faith or being at dissension and disunion with their brethren do eat unworthily. And, therefore, it is that in our kirks our ministers take public and particular examination of the knowledge and conversation of such as are to be admitted to the table of the Lord Jesus (Art. 23).

James T. Dennison Jr. ed., Reformed Confessions of the 16th and 17th Centuries in English Translation: 1523–1693, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2008–14), 204.

RESOURCES

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

    Post authored by:

  • Heidelblog
    Author Image

    The Heidelblog has been in publication since 2007. It is devoted to recovering the Reformed confession and to helping others discover Reformed theology, piety, and practice.

    More by Heidelblog ›

Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!


2 comments

    • Dé,

      In Belgic Confession art. 18 the Reformed churches denounced them as heretics for their doctrine of the “celestial flesh” of Christ.

      Therefore we confess, against the heresy of the Anabaptists who deny that Christ assumed human flesh from his mother, that he “shared the very flesh and blood of children”;35 that he is “fruit of the loins of David” according to the flesh;36 “born of the seed of David” according to the flesh;37 “fruit of the womb of the virgin Mary”;38 “born of a woman”;39 “the seed of David”;40 “a shoot from the root of Jesse”;41 “the offspring of Judah,”42 having descended from the Jews according to the flesh; “from the seed of Abraham”—for he “assumed Abraham’s seed” and was “made like his brothers except for sin.”43 In this way he is truly our Immanuel—that is: “God with us.”44

      I don’t know if they still hold it but my experience is that a lot of evangelicals unwittingly hold something like it. I call it the “Star Trek Christology.”

      A bit more:

      1. Calvin Contra The Star Trek Christology
      2. Born Of A Woman: Against The Star Trek Christology
      3. The So-Called “Celestial Flesh” Christology Is Just Gnosticism
      Reply ↓

Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments are welcome but must observe the moral law. Comments that are profane, deny the gospel, advance positions contrary to the Reformed confession, or that irritate the management are subject to deletion. Anonymous comments, posted without permission, are forbidden. Please use a working email address so we can contact you, if necessary, about content or corrections.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.