My selection of the book We and Our Children, by Herman Hanko, was in no small part due to my interest in the Protestant Reformed Churches with their strong position on the biblical doctrine of “The Covenant of Grace” and Herman Hoeksema’s “battle” with Abraham Kuyper on covenant theology. This eventually (1924) led to Hoeksema’s deposition by the Christian Reformed Synod because of his rejection of common grace.
Although Hoeksema highly esteemed Abraham Kuyper, he rejected his viewpoint on God’s covenant with Noah, which was not the covenant established with the church, but a covenant of common grace established with every human being, with the wicked world as such. It is at this juncture that the Christian Reformed Synod formulated the “Three Points”:
1. That the grace of God is not particular, not for the elect alone, but sustains a certain covenant of friendship with natural man.
2. That immediately after the fall in paradise a certain operation of grace, though not regenerating a man, prevents him from becoming as corrupt as he would have become without this operation of grace.
3. That with this operation of “common grace” in natural man he can do very much that is good. He leads a relatively good life in this earthly sphere and relationships.1
I include this history in my critique because it enriches the biblical meaning of the Covenant of Grace as set forth in the, book. We and Our Children, by Herman Hanko, who had Herman Hoeksema as his mentor. (Reverend Herman Hanko is professor of church history and New Testament in the Protestant Reformed Theological Seminary.) In covenant theology as revealed in Scripture and expounded by Calvin, the grace of God is not inclusive but particular.
The strength of this treatise is found in the fact that it deals with those Baptists who claim they are truly Reformed in their theology. In western Michigan we have “The Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids.” In this context Professor Hanko writes that this has forced “all defenders of Paedobaptism to take a second look at their position and examine it in the light of Scripture.” The author not only does this, but does it well. He makes his conclusions by evaluating the “Reformed Baptist” position as set forth in the book written by David Kingdon entitled Children of Abraham.2
This small book, Hanko claims, is the most articulate and best reasoned of all defenses of the Reformed Baptist position. Hanko holds that:
… the defense of Paedobaptism is not always what it ought to be. Many who have written extensively in this field have presented arguments which are less than convincing to a committed Baptist because they have failed to understand the Scriptural idea of the covenant of grace …. Failing to see that the covenant is always organic, they have left large loopholes in their arguments and have given Baptists abundant opportunity to criticize their position on various counts.3
In his thesis Hanko makes the following statements:
1. A Reformed Baptist is really an impossibility.
2. The Baptist who defends freewill, man’s initiative in the work of salvation, resistible grace, the altar call, the free and well-meaning offer of the gospel, is the Baptist who is consistent.
3. The Baptist, on the other hand, who maintains the doctrine of grace, and repudiates dispensationalism is inconsistent in his theology-he may claim that he is a Calvinist . . . he may repudiate dispensationalism but he is guilty of a happy inconsistency for all that.
These keen observations by Rev. Hanko are basic to a real understanding of the Scriptural doctrine of the covenant of grace which he sets forth with Scriptural conviction and as the believers’ response to the truth of the covenant of grace.
The student who seeks to explore the doctrine of infant baptism would profit greatly from reading Hanko’s book, We and Our Children. One will appreciate the extensive quotations from Kingdon’s book, Children of Abraham. This affords the reader an unusual opportunity of sitting in on a great debate on the subject of Paedobaptism.
The Reformed Baptist, as represented by Kingdon, certainly repudiates the dispensational position and rebukes his fellow Baptists for holding to it. Kingdon does this in his effort to affirm the unity of the old and new dispensations for the purpose of affirming the unity of the covenant. His view of circumcision is that it is of national and spiritual significance. He really departs from the Reformed position when he contends that the seed of Abraham belong only to those who are true believers. For this reason Reformed Baptists believe that repentance and faith are necessary for one to belong to the covenant. Hanko rightly observes:
Kingdon fails to deal with this typical character of the old dispensation. He fails to see that the land of Canaan was but a type and picture of heaven. He fails to see that Israel itself was a picture of the church of every age . . . . Thus the essence of the covenant and of the promise of the covenant remained the same.4
On the basis of Scripture (Gal. 3:23-29; Gal. 4:1-7) Hanko comes to a meaningful conclusion on this matter:
It is clear from the passage that Paul compares the church of the old dispensation with that of the new under the figure of a child who grows to manhood. The church of the old dispensation is like a small child who needs instruction. He is indeed the heir of all the possessions of his father. But he cannot have this inheritance yet for he is but a child and will not know what to do with it. And so he is under a schoolmaster. . . . Throughout the whole old dispensation the church was under the instruction of the schoolmaster of the law. . . . But God continued to give this church His instruction . . . (until) the church became, in the fullest sense of the word, sons and heirs of God through Christ.5
The instructive thrust of the “debate” between Professor Hanko and Kingdon is most rewarding to follow. In part:
Kingdon: The interpretation that the Apostle Paul gives to the concept of “the seed of Abraham” establishes the principle that the ordinance of baptism should now be applied only to those who show credible evidence of being in union with Christ, for only those in union with him are Abraham’s seed (Galatians 3:29) . . . . The New Testament leaves us in no doubt that such is nothing other than a credible profession of faith in Christ. Hanko: The serious mistake which Kingdon makes is the error of making separation between the two dispensations even though he maintains that there is unity in some respects. The whole Baptist position hangs on this point and any refutation of the Baptist position must show that the unity of the two dispensations is far greater than Kingdon will acknowledge . . . . This . . . means that the covenant is one and the promises of the covenant are one; but that they are differently administered . . . . This is not difficult to prove. 6
One issue that seems to be constantly active is the issue of whether God saves His church in the line of continued generations.
Kingdon: Since I maintain that children as such no longer have covenantal significance it follows . . . (say some), that I deny that God works along the lines of generations, and that therefore I am guilty, in the end, of maintaining a purely individualistic doctrine of conversion . . . . I fail to see that because I reject the baptism of infants that I am obliged to deny that God works in families.
Hanko: That God saves His people in the line of continued generations is clearly taught in Scripture. The first line of proof lies in the fact that repeatedly in Scripture specific commands of God come to children as well as to adults. And the important and interesting part of these commands of Jehovah God is that these commands are given on the grounds that children as well as adults are included in God’s covenant.7
The scriptures cited by Professor Hanko are abundant. They weave a golden thread of covenant grace into a meaningful pattern of both the sign and the seal of the covenant. For me it struck a response of thanksgiving and praise, for it is not what we who are believing parents have done, but rather what our sovereign God has done. This is expressed by Hanko when he writes:
So it is with God’s covenant. That stream of God’s covenant began already at its source in paradise with Adam. As it runs throughout history, many new streams of new generations come into that covenant from the outside where they lose their original identity and become the people of God!
The strength of Hanko’s book is that it answers the position of the “Reformed Baptists” – and if you can answer them, you will have little trouble answering the regular Baptists!
In conclusion I quote Hanko:
And so we baptize infants. It is the command of God through all age? Those who fail to do this must recognize that they live in disobedience to the Lord. They have no true conception of the covenant. They cannot avoid dispensationalism. They remain individualistic in their thinking. And they do injustice to the children God has given to them.
To the people of God in every age it is a great comfort that God indeed saves them and their children. It is God’s unfailing mercy and grace. To Him be the glory forever?
Dr. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, visiting Professor of New Testament and Reformation Studies at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, has earned an international reputation as a widely learned scholar in the fields of exegesis, theology and church history. This book, containing essays by his friends and colleagues, is written in his honor.
The book is divided into four parts: New Testament Studies, Old Testament Studies, Historical and Theological Studies, and a bibliography of Dr. Hughes’ writings.
The first two sections are of interest to and can only be, for the most part, understood by scholars who work in colleges, universities, and seminaries. They also are often written from the viewpoint of literary historical criticism of Scripture.
The third section is the one for me, and the one which will be of value to any who wish to delve into historical and theological studies.
J. I. Packer has an essay on different kinds of Arminianism and the differences between these Arminianisms and Calvinism. The essay is so good that it is worth the price of the book Packer deals with the Arminian controversy in The Netherlands in the latter 16th and early 17th century and, with theological insight, analyzes the issues. But he moves over to England and. discusses the different kinds of Arminianism that appeared in that land, carefully analyzing their erroneous theologies. He demonstrates clearly how even such well known Puritans as Jeremy Taylor, Thomas Goodwin, and Richard Baxter moved into the Arminian camp with their views of justification on grounds other than Christ’s perfect atoning sacrifice.
Dr. Packer delivered a paper on the same subject at the Leicester Conference in 1868 which was later published (along with the other papers) under the title, “The Manifold Grace of God.” This chapter is a modification and expansion of that original paper.
W. Stanford Reid talks about the influences of Calvin’s early legal training on his reformatory work. Roger Nicole has an interesting article on Friedrich Spanheim, Calvinist theologian in Geneva and Leyden. W. Wilson Benton, Jr., has an excellent article on federal theology in the 16th and early 17th century, with a penetrating analysis of the covenant of works and the idea of the covenant as an agreement between God and man. John N. Akers has an article on Southern Presbyterians and Slave Missions, and W. Robert Godfrey has a valuable article on the idea of the relation between church and state in Dutch Calvinism.
Buy the book and read this excellent section.
This is a useful collection of ten confessions, or confessional-type statements, from the era of the Reformation. Included are “The Ninety-five Theses of Martin Luther (1517)”; “The Sixty-Seven Articles of Ulrich Zwingli (1523)”; “The Schleitheim Confession (1527)”; “Martin Luther’s Small Catechism (1529)”;. “The Heidelberg Catechism (1563)”; “Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent (1545-1563)”; “Profession of the Tridentine Faith (1564)”; and “The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England (1571).”
“The Schleitheim Confession is the confession of the Anabaptists, spiritual ancestors of today’s Baptists. The first article of their faith concerns baptism. The second sentence of this first article runs, “This excludes all infant baptism, the highest and chief abomination of the pope.” This lays bare Anabaptism.” The Augsburg Confession is the creed of the Lutheran churches. The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent and the Profession of the Tridentine Faith are Roman Catholic confessions. Only excerpts from the lengthy Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent are given. These excerpts are taken from the doctrinal portions of the Roman creed. The other confessions appear in their entirety.
“Brief introductions set the documents in historical and theological perspective.”
Especially those who do not have access to some or even many of these confessions in other volumes will welcome this collection. It will be useful for reference. Those who have never read Luther’s ninety-five theses and small catechism, Zwingli’s sixty-seven articles, and the Genevan Confession will want to do so for sheer edification. Here is the beginning of the section in Luther’s small catechism in which the Reformer instructs fathers how to teach the Lord’s Prayer to their families:
“Our Father who art in heaven.”
What does this mean?
Answer: Here God would encourage us to believe that he is truly our Father and we are truly his children in order that we may approach him boldly and confidently in prayer, even as beloved children approach their dear father (p. 69).
Reading through the confessions as they appear in this collection reminded me that the Reformed believer does well to be suspicious of modern translations of the creeds, even as he does well to be suspicious of modem translations of Holy Scripture. Other principles of translation prevail nowadays than the principle of scrupulous faithfulness to the original text. An instance is Allen O. Miller and M. Eugene Osterhaven’s translation of Question 103 of the Heidelberg Catechism:
What does God require in the fourth commandment? First, that the ministry of the gospel and Christian education be maintained, and that I diligently attend church, especially on the Lord’s day… (p. 159).
My concern here is not with the translation, “Christian education,” although this is a dubious rendering of the German, die Schulen, “the schools.” The reference of the Catechism is not to some form of Christian education of its members by the church, but to the seminaries and, by implication, to the Christian day schools. What is objectionable is the translation of the German, Feiertag, as “Lord’s day.” Feiertag means “sabbath,” or “day of rest.” To substitute “Lord’s day” for “sabbath” in Question 103 of the Catechism is to obscure a truth that is of crucial importance for Reformed Christians, and one that is well-nigh lost today, the truth, namely, that their behavior on the first day of the week is sabbath-observance. To put it differently, the Catechism’s deliberate use of Feiertag in Question 103 makes clear that the Lord’s day is the New Testament sabbath and that the fourth commandment of the law is still in force, requiring observance of a day.
*This critique of Prof. Hanko’s book was given recently by the Rev. Henry Kik, minister of Congregational Care Laketon Bethel Reformed Church of Muskegon, Michigan. Because of the nature of the critique and because of the importance of the issue, we publish this critique for the benefit of the readers of the Standard Bearer. – Ed.
1. Therefore Have I Spoken, Hoeksema, G., 1969.
2. University Tutorial Press Ltd., Foxton, England.
3. We and Our Children, Hanko, pp. 10ff.
4. Ibid., pp. 22ff.
5. Ibid., pp. 23ff.
6. Ibid., pp. 26ff.
7. Ibid., pp. 43ff.
8. Ibid., p. 87.
9. Ibid., p. 90.
The Standard Bearer is a monthly, 32-page print magazine devoted to explaining and defending reformed doctrine, promoting the Reformed life of the church and believer, and combating old and new errors that threaten to disrupt the Reformed faith and life.
THE STANDARD BEARER IS a PUBLICATION BY the REFORMED FREE PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ©2025.
