C8 
 
 Q_ 
 
 
 .^ 
 
 
 .5 
 
 
 /? 
 
 
 1c 
 
 1 
 
 * 
 
 
 ■a 
 
 
 ->»-,^ 
 
 
 IE 
 
 
 •~^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 CL 
 
 
 # W 
 
 
 
 
 
 *s? 
 
 fc 
 
 O 
 
 
 I 
 
 to 
 
 „ 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 fe 
 
 
 
 
 *-► 
 
 o 
 
 bfl 
 
 
 P\ 
 
 S 
 
 
 < 
 "a 
 
 
 
 
 fc 
 
 E 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 ( j 
 
 
 -sj 
 
 ^* 
 
 « 
 
 CO 
 
 & 
 
 -»-* 
 ^ 
 
 ft 
 
 2 
 
 3. 
 
 O 
 
 
 JO 
 
 8 
 ^ 
 
 « 
 
 
 ■a 
 
 c 
 
 8- 
 
 £ 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^sB 
 
 ?* 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 7o755 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/doctrineofholyba 
 
BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 
 
 BY 
 
 HERMAN HOOKER, 
 
 S. W. Corner of Eighth and Chestnut Streets, 
 PHILADELPHIA. 
 
 The Sayings of the Great Forty Days between the Resurrection 
 and Ascention of our Saviour, regarded as the outlines of the 
 Kingdom of God, in Five Discourses, with an examination 
 of Mr. Newman's Theory of Developments, by George Mo- 
 berly, D. C. L., Head Master of Winchester College : 
 
 This is the work of one of the profoundest theologians of this 
 age. It has already passed through three editions in England, 
 and attained the place of a standard work on the great subject 
 on which it treats. 
 
 The Doctrine of the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ, in its 
 Relation to Mankind and the Church, by Archdeacon Wil- 
 berforce : 
 
 This has been styled " the Book of the Age." The " Church 
 Review" says :— " It is adapted to the present state of religious 
 doctrine throughout nominal Christendom. It is a thoroughly 
 learned book." 
 
 First Principles of the Doctrine of Christ, in a Series of Dis- 
 courses delivered in the Parish of Trinity Church, New York, 
 by the Rev. M. P. Parks. 
 
 This is an earnest and faithful declaration of the Church's 
 Doctrine of Baptism, and of the training of Children. The 
 spirit of olden time is this work. 
 
 Bickersteth on the Thirty-nine Articles : 
 
 This is a work which deserves to be better known than it is. 
 The Author is a sound Churchman. He sets forth the Catholic 
 sense of the Articles with proofs from the Fathers. 
 
 A Treaties on the Church, by Thomas Jackson, D. D. 
 1 
 
THE 
 
 DOCTRINE OF HOLY BAPTISM: 
 
 WITH REMARKS ON THE REV. W. GOOnE^ 
 
 "EFFECTS OF INFANT BAPTISM." 
 / 
 
 BY ROBERT ISAAC '"WlLBERFORCE, A. M., 
 
 ARCHDEACON OF THE EAST RIDING. 
 
 "In causa duorum hominum, quorum per unum venumdati sumua 
 Bub peccato, per alterum rerlimimur a peccatis, proprie fides Christiana 
 cons is tit." — S. Acgustiajus. 
 
 "Origincm quam sumpsit in utero Virginisposuit in fonte baptismatis: 
 dedit aqua), quod dedii inatri." — S. Leo. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 PUBLISHED BY HERMAN HOOKER, 
 
 S. W. CORNER EIGHTH AND CHESTNUT STS. 
 
 1S50. 
 
f 
 
 '<e 
 
 % 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 NEW GROUND TAKEN BY THE OPPONENTS OF BAP- 
 TISMAL REGENERATION— ITS INCOMPATIBILITY 
 WITH CALVINISM. 
 
 Inconvenience of this mode of arguing. 
 
 1st, As creating a prejudice against the Reformers. 
 2dly, As creating disaffection against the Church. 
 3dly, As involving a forgetfulness of the Primi- 
 tive character of her Formularies. 
 
 Tenets of the Church of England proved hy experi- 
 ence not to be identical with those of Continental 
 Protestantism. 
 Three points proposed. 
 
 1st, To state the Church's doctrine on Holy Bap- 
 tism. 
 2dly, To show that it is not inconsistent with the 
 Primitive Doctrine of Decrees, or even with 
 the adoption of Calvinistic phraseology. 
 3dly, To show that our Formularies were not 
 
 compiled by Calvinists. - 15-23 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 It implies two parties, God the Giver of grace, man its 
 receiver. God gives grace through the Mediator — 
 by whom the old intercourse of nature superseded. 
 
 ( v ) 
 
VI CONTENTS. 
 
 The Gospel History of the gift of grace. Doxologiea. 
 Man receives grace through the New Head of 
 
 our race. 
 Man's common nature reconstructed — and that 
 
 in all its parts. 
 Opposition to this change through surviving con- 
 cupiscence — and from the individual principle 
 of responsibility. 
 Regeneration is Christ's taking up his dwelling in man. 24-40 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE AS TO THE TIME 
 AND MANNER IN WHICH REGENERATION IS BE- 
 STOWED. 
 
 Gift of Regeneration asserted to be bestowed in Holy 
 Baptism. Preliminary cautions. Hooker's state- 
 ment. Three previous objections to be removed. 
 1st, The inconsonance of the means to the end. 
 2dly, Supposed interference with God's sove- 
 reignty. 
 3dly, The want of practical effect. 
 Reply to the third objection — that Baptism the gift of 
 
 means, not of results. 
 Need of improved Church discipline and Church in- 
 struction. 
 Reply to the two first objections — the Mediation of the 
 God-man implies that God has decreed to bestow 
 grace through Sacraments, and thus renders this 
 mode of conveying it probable. 
 
 Direct evidence from Scripture for Regeneration in 
 Baptism. Objections — 
 
 1st, That grace is not tied to Baptism, 
 2d, That to identify Baptism with Regeneration 
 derogates from Conversion and Faith. 
 Answer to 1st, Baptism our means of union with the 
 Humanity of Christ — not only the removal of guilt, 
 but the re-creation of nature. 
 Answer to 2d, Conversion and Faith needful on the 
 part of men — Baptism the means of a gift on the 
 part of God. Conversion the submission of the 
 individual responsibility to God's will. — Regenera- 
 tion the renewal of the common nature. - - 40-61 
 
CONTENTS. VU 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE EFFICACY OF HOLY BAPTISM ACCORDING TO 
 THE AUTHORIZED FORMULARIES OF THE CHURCH 
 OF ENGLAND. 
 
 The Church of England proposes a definite view 
 respecting Holy Baptism, in her Offices and Cate- 
 chism. 
 
 This view must be accepted by those who employ her 
 Offices. 
 
 Mr. Goode admits that our Service favours a belief in 
 Baptismal Grace. 
 
 Its different parts shown to harmonize with this belief. 61-71 
 
 Mr. Goode objects that since qualificati-ons are required 
 in adult, they may be required also in Infant, Bap- 
 tism. 
 He adduces three qualifying conditions : — 
 
 1. Sentence of Election. 2. Provision of Faith 
 and Repentance. 3. Present Faith. 
 But these conditions not suggested, as they should 
 be, by the Church's words, but by consideration 
 of the parties, i. e., of the Giver or receiver of 
 Grace. 
 The Church's unqualified words could not be de- 
 fended, because her words might have been qualified. 
 3d Condition. — Luther did not attribute actual faith 
 to children, but supposed the seed of faith to be 
 infused by the Holy Ghost. 
 1st Condition. — Sentence of election involves the 
 
 harsh doctrine of the Reprobation of Children. 
 2d Condition. — Rejected on account of its Pelagian 
 
 tendency. ..... 71-82 
 
 These conditions put forward as justifying the theory 
 of a charitable sense. 
 
 Charitable sense not applicable cither to adult or in- 
 fant Baptism, because should be applied before 
 Baptism as well as after it: whereas tho Church 
 declares meet Catechumens unregenerate, and does 
 not assert the salvation except of baptized infants. 
 
 The Church's confidence respecting the salvation of 
 
Y1H CONTENTS. 
 
 baptized infants, limited by Mr. Goode to the child- 
 ren of devout persons. 
 
 This limitation contravenes the Church's laws. And 
 
 the intention of her Offices. ... 87-104 
 
 Answer in the concluding part of the Catechism not 
 designed to represent the efficacy of Baptism to be 
 conditional. 
 
 Such an interpretation would be Pelagian. 
 
 No Sponsors undertake to express the individual voli- 
 tions, but only the legal responsibilities, of the in- 
 fants whom they represent. 
 
 Avowed intention of Bishop Overall, and of the Sa- 
 voy Commissioners. 
 
 Ironical meaning assigned by Mr. Goode, to the ex- 
 pressions of the Catechism. 
 
 Singular agreement of uninterested parties respecting 
 
 the meaning of our Church's Offices. - - 104—116 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 [THE DOCTRINE OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION OF 
 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE. 
 
 Unfortunate ignoratio ehnchi, which has led some 
 advocates for Baptism to depreciate Regeneration ; 
 some who were zealous for Regeneration to under- 
 value Baptism. 
 
 Belief in Baptismal Regeneration essential to a due 
 appreciation of Christian responsibilities. 
 
 Lis connexion with a belief in Our Lord's Mediation — 
 as affording a criterion how far men really believe 
 in God's influence in sacraments; irrespective of the 
 co-operation of the human recipient. 
 
 The Sacramental system the means whereby the Me- 
 diator acts upon men. 
 
 So that its denial leads to Pelagianism, and re- 
 presents men as their own Saviours. Baxter's 
 testimony. 
 
 A difference of men's phraseology may be remedied by 
 explanation: dilferences in belief between those 
 who reject and those who accept the doctrine of 
 Mediation wili be only increased by it. - - 116-142 
 
CONTENTS. IX 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 HOW FAR BELIEF IN BAPTISMAL REGENERATION IS 
 CONSISTENT WITH ADHERENCE TO CALVINISM. 
 
 Necessity of considering the new ground, on which 
 Mr. Goode rests his opposition to Baptismal regene- 
 ration. 
 
 His three propositions. 
 
 The doctrines of Predestination, Election, and Perse- 
 verance, rest first on God's Prescience ; secondly, on 
 His Pre-appointment. 
 
 God's first Decree respecting man referred to his state 
 before the Fall. 
 
 This Decree having been frustrated through the Fall, 
 God's second Decree referred to that New Head of 
 man's race, by whom the Fall was to be remedied. 
 
 Its object the elect Head and His members. 
 
 It does not supersede the individual responsibility of 
 men, but refers to the recreation of that common 
 nature, which is communicated from the Head to 
 His members. 
 
 It insures protection against the kingdom of darkness. 
 So that the Church's doctrine of Decrees was a 
 shadow cast beforehand by the facts of Mediation. - 142-157 
 
 God's decreed dealings with man through Mediation 
 spoken of by the ancient writers as regards, 1st, the 
 gift of grace, 2dly, its employment : — 
 
 And their cause supposed to vary, as does their 
 nature ,• regarded as a gift they depend upon 
 God's free mercy ; regarded in their employment 
 man's responsibility is included. 
 St. Austin's dispute with the Pelagians respected the 
 manner of the Divine gift of grace; whether be- 
 stowed according to the law of Mediation, or the 
 law of nature. Therefore it left human responsi- 
 bility untouched. 
 Greater difficulty of the controversy with the Semi- 
 Pelagians; respecting Preventing grace. 
 St. Austin's early notions respecting faith inconsistent 
 with the freeness of God's gift of grace : — At a later 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 period he refers Preventing grace to trie Divine gift 
 through the Mediator, so as not to be independent 
 of the Sacramental system, or to supersede the re- 
 sponsibility of man. ... 157-169 
 
 Calvin's system the transference of God's Decrees from 
 the gift of grace to its employment. 
 
 Its effect to destroy man's responsibility. 
 
 His object to dispense with the Sacramental system of 
 the Church. 
 
 The influence and purpose of the doctrine of Media- 
 tion proportionably interfered with ; and thus a door 
 opened for Pelagianism. 
 
 St. Austin did not admit the characteristic parts of 
 Calvin's theory, since he supposed that the Media- 
 tor acted through the Sacramental system; and 
 therefore, that God's Decrees referred to the gift of 
 grace through man's renewal in Christ. 
 
 Belief in Baptismal grace the criterion whether men 
 adopt that part of Calvin's system, which interferes 
 with the doctrine of Mediation, or only employ his 
 phraseology. - - - 169-179 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE FORMULARIES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 
 WERE NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 
 
 Reasons for not entering upon the subject of the 
 
 Articles. 
 The Service-Book sufficient to decide the question. 
 Three especial eras in its history. 
 
 I. What was the intention of those who compiled it, 
 a.i). 1548-9. 
 
 Necessity of following Mr. Goode in his inquiry into 
 the sentiments of Peter Lombard. 
 
 The efficacy of Baptism universally believed by Lom- 
 bard's predecessors. St. Bernard. 
 
 Lombard's opinion that sanctification arose from in- 
 dwelling of the Holy Ghost; he asserts fully that 
 grace was given in Baptism. 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 This truth universally admitted in the Mediaeval 
 Church. Council of Vienne. 
 
 Mr. Goode has mistaken the doubt entertained respect- 
 ing infused habits in Baptism, for a doubt respect- 
 ing Baptismal grace. 
 
 Hence the argument, which he founds on Cranmer's 
 language, turns against himself. 
 
 For the only expressions which can be supposed to 
 connect Cranmer with the Calvinistic system were 
 used before he deviated in any way from the re- 
 ceived opinions of the Medieval Church — therefore 
 such expressions are consistent with belief in Bap- 
 tismal grace. 
 
 The expressions in the "Institution of a Christian 
 
 Man," shown not to be really Calvinistic. - - 179-215 
 
 Cranmer's Catechism asserts a belief in Baptismal re- 
 generation. 
 
 Its statements explained by Mr. Goode on the princi- 
 ple (erroneously) attributed to Luther, that infants 
 possess actual faith. 
 
 But Cranmer had been stated by Mr. Goode not to 
 entertain this opinion. 
 
 Cranmer's language in this Catechism, and in the 
 Homilies, decidedly Anti-Calvinistic. 
 
 Ungrounded attack upon Archbishop Laurence. Mar- 
 tin Bucer, and Peter Martyr. - - - 215-229 
 
 II. Second era in the compilation of the Service-Book, 
 A.i). 1604. 
 
 Bishop Overall no Calvinist. 
 
 III. Third era. The Savoy Conference. 
 
 The service for Adult Baptism confessedly drawn up 
 
 by Anti-Calvinists. 
 The Consecration of the Water inserted in opposition 
 
 to the sentiments of Bucer. - 230-239 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE ENGLISH DIVINES ALWAYS MAINTAINED THEIR 
 BELIEF IN THE EFFICACY OF BAPTISMAL GRACE. 
 
 Mr. Goode's Third Proposition: — That the preva- 
 lence which the Calvinistic Doctrine of Absolute 
 
XH CONTENTS. 
 
 Decrees at one time attained in the English Church, 
 is incompatible with the idea that her formularies 
 teach Baptismal Regeneration. 
 Mr. Goode cites passages of two sorts, 1st, expressing 
 low views of Sacraments. 2dly, implying a belief 
 in Calvinistic Decrees. 
 
 I. Authorities of the first kind mistaken. Jewell — - 
 Davenant. Former perversions no excuse for 
 present. 
 
 II. Calvinistic Decrees held nominally by Divines 
 of the English Church, who had not tested their 
 opinions. 
 
 General Course of Events. Calvinism either outgrown 
 through the progress of thought, or objected to in 
 consequence of the offensiveness of the dogma of 
 Reprobation. Bishop Sanderson. - - 240-252 
 
 Where Calvinistic Decrees were really held, the doc- 
 trine of Baptismal grace was not necessarily denied. 
 Calvinism kept in check by the language of the 
 Church. Assertion by two of the delegates at Dort, 
 Davenant and Ward, that Calvinistic Decrees no 
 hindrance to belief in Baptismal grance. Arch- 
 bishop Usher's concurrence. 
 
 Three principles, which influenced men: — 1st, Harsh- 
 ness of the Doctrine of Reprobation as applied to 
 Infants. 2d. The Church's language. 3d. The 
 language of Antiquity. 
 
 Distinct statements of the universality of grace by Da- 
 venant and Ward. 
 
 Mr. Goode explains away these expressions, as mean- 
 ing nothing more than his theory of infantine re- 
 ge?ieration. 
 
 The dispute turns upon the point whether all infants 
 are subjects for Baptism. 
 
 Mr. Goode denies them to be fit subjects for Baptism, 
 without a qualification. 
 
 The qualification not in the Giver of grace, because 
 this would imply the Reprobation of infants, which 
 Mr. Goode does not assert : nor in the condition of 
 receiver : therefore it must be in the receiver's cir- 
 cumstances, i. e., in his Parents. 
 
 Therefore children supposed by Mr. Goode to be ac- 
 cepted through the faith of their Parents. 
 
CONTENTS. Xlll 
 
 Effect of this system to represent the Parents as Me- 
 diators for their children with God ; and thus to in- 
 terfere with the prerogative of Christ. 
 
 It follows that none but the children of consistent 
 Christians should be baptized. 
 
 But Ward and Davenant were opposed to such a re- 
 striction, consequently they could not hold Mr. 
 Goode's notion of the " infantine regeneration" of 
 qualified parties, but the real doctrine of Baptismal 
 grace. 
 
 The same inference is to be drawn from the Canons 
 and usages of the Church, by which the need of 
 a peculiar qualification for Baptism is excluded. 
 Hooker's judgment adverse to Mr. Goode. 
 
 Therefore the efficacy of Baptismal grace was fully ad- 
 mitted, even by those who were supposed to receive 
 the Calvinistic doctrine of Absolute Decrees. " 
 
 God's promises must not be explained away by refer' 
 
 ence to His secret counsels. - - 253 — 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Two main propositions affirmed by the Church. 
 
 1. That God bestows grace of regeneration through 
 Baptism. 
 
 2. That he bestows it on all infants. 
 Two counter-theories. 
 
 1. Rationalistic — that gift never bestowed through 
 Baptism. 
 
 2. That not bestowed on all infants. 
 
 The second theory grounded on the need of qualifica- 
 tions. 
 
 To suppose the qualification to be an absolute Decree 
 of the Giver of Grace involves the tenet of Repro- 
 bation. 
 
 To refer it to the foreseen excellence of the receiver or 
 to the excellence of his parents, is Pelagian. 
 
 The only qualification allowed by the Church is the 
 
 common one of helplessness. - 281-291 
 

 THE DOCTKINE 
 
 OF 
 
 HOLY BAPTISM. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The controversy respecting Baptismal Regene- 
 ration has of late assumed a new form, and shifted 
 the ground on which it was formerly contested. 
 Any one who will refer to the writings of Arch- 
 bishop Laurence, one of its main advocates in the 
 last generation, will find that to identify the de- 
 nial of this doctrine with an adoption of that 
 which he represented as the harsh and repulsive 
 system of Calvinism, was among his constant ob- 
 jects. While on the other hand his opponent, 
 Mr. Scott, asserts distinctly and repeatedly, that 
 the denial of Baptismal Regeneration has no sort 
 of connexion with the obnoxious tenets of Calvin. 
 He heads his pages with the title — " The Ques- 
 tion not Calvinistic." "Dr. Laurence's repre- 
 senting the whole question as a Calvinistic one," 
 he notices as a great " instance of unfairness j?' 
 
 (15) 
 
 
16 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and he sums up his objections by saying, "what 
 pretext can there be for asserting, that the ques- 
 tion whether spiritual regeneration is, or is not, 
 inseparable from baptism, has any necessary con- 
 nexion with the doctrines of absolute predestina- 
 tion, and indefectible grace? The assertion has 
 no foundation in the nature of things, and it is 
 directly contradicted by fact." 1 
 
 Now, that a certain general consonance inclines 
 those who hold strongly with Calvin to take low 
 views of sacramental efficacy, can hardly be 
 doubted ; but Mr. Scott is an unanswerable wit- 
 ness, when he asserts that the theory of Calvin 
 and the doctrine of Baptismal Grace are not so 
 practically irreconcilable, that those who adhere 
 to the one must forego the other. And yet this 
 is the position on which Mr. Goode's recent work 
 on the effects of Infant Baptism is based. The 
 object of this work is to show that the Church of 
 England does not affirm that all children,, duly- 
 brought to baptism, are recipients of grace. This 
 consequence follows at once, according to Mr. 
 Goode's opinion, if it can be demonstrated that 
 those who compiled our Formularies were Cal- 
 vinists. "If," he says, " it shall appear (and I 
 believe it to be undeniable) that their doctrine 
 was in the most important points what is now 
 called ' Calvinistic,' there is, or ought to be, an 
 end to the controversy as to the interpretation they 
 intended to be given to our Formularies, both as it 
 respects Baptism, and several other points."* 
 
 1 " Reply to Laurence," by the Rev. John Scott, p. 3 and 8. 
 2 " The Effects of Baptism in the case of Infants," by the 
 Rev. W. Goode. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 17 
 
 Thus does he take for granted, as the very basis 
 of his position, that which Mr. Scott had so em- 
 phatically denied. 
 
 This new footing, upon which Mr. Goode de- 
 sires to place the Baptismal question, is open to 
 some great objections. First — Its effect upon the 
 credit of our Reformers will be very different from 
 any thing which he can desire. For the Formu- 
 laries, which they have left to the Church, are a 
 plain record of their public declarations. Now, 
 if these are not to be taken in their obvious and 
 apparent sense, because the Reformers selected 
 ambiguous expressions, which concealed from an 
 " only half-protestantized people" 3 (as some have 
 worded it) the full theory which was lurking in 
 their own minds, what will result but the con- 
 viction that they taught one thing and believed 
 another? Yet Mr. Goode is compelled to ad- 
 mit, as the issue of his laborious investigation into 
 the language of our Baptismal Services, that " the 
 expressions evidently favour the notion of their 
 referring to the full baptismal blessing." So that 
 his authority maybe cited by those opponents of 
 the English Reformation, who attribute time-serv- 
 ing and dishonourable motives to its supporters. 
 And the benefit which he will do to his own 
 friends by bringing the Reformers over to their 
 party, will be far less than the injury which he 
 will do to the Reformers themselves. 
 
 Secondly — It has hitherto been supposed, that 
 to look with reverence and humility at the Divine 
 
 3 Gorham's " Examination for admission to a Benefice." — In- 
 troduction, p. 28. 
 
 2* 
 
18 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Decrees, and even to employ language respecting 
 them which was borrowed from the school of 
 Calvin, was not incompatible with en entire ad- 
 mission of all which the Church of England de- 
 clared respecting Baptismal grace. Man's reason 
 may be too weak, or his knowledge not suffi- 
 ciently comprehensive, to enable him to bring 
 these two systems together with logical exactness. 
 But this is no reason w 7 hy either should be aban- 
 doned. The Doctrine of Decrees has been as 
 widely held in the Church of Rome as in the 
 Church of England. And it is to be regretted 
 that Mr. Goode should attempt to revive a diffi- 
 culty, which was in great measure forgotten ; and 
 should tell those of our brethren who employ the 
 language of Calvin, that they cannot receive the 
 Baptismal services, in that sense, which (accord- 
 ing to his own w T ords) its " expressions evidently 
 favour." 
 
 Thirdly — Mr. Goode seems to forget that the 
 professed purpose of our English Divines, was to 
 reform an old Church, not to construct a new one. 
 Hence he supposes that those theoretical notions 
 respecting the Divine Decrees, which he alleges 
 that our Reformers borrowed from foreign sources, 
 w T ere not only a part of their system of Divinity, 
 but the whole of it. Any opinion which does not 
 range with the system of Calvin, he lops off with- 
 out question. Now, this is to make Calvinism 
 not only a part of our Theology, but its basis. 
 Nor w 7 ould it be unjust in speaking of new insti- 
 tutions, like those introduced at Geneva ; since 
 the whole code of laws was drawn in this case 
 from one original mind, and they present, there- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 19 
 
 fore, the perfect impress of his systematizing rea- 
 son. But, however Calvin may be pretended to 
 have influenced our theology, it cannot be al- 
 leged that he created it. Are the laws, usages, 
 liturgy, and creeds, which had been handed down 
 from early times, to go for nothing? Here, 
 again, we may refer to Mr. Scott's authority. 
 " Whence," he asks, " did the Church of Eng- 
 land derive all the peculiar language, which she 
 employs concerning newly baptized infants ? She 
 did not invent it. She borrowed it from primi- 
 tive times. 1 ' 4 If our Church, therefore, had 
 designed to admit the theory of Calvin respect- 
 ing God's decrees, it does not at once follow 
 that she must abandon the doctrines of the 
 ancient Fathers respecting God's promises. Her 
 position is wholly different from that of a society, 
 which had agreed to take its laws, ritual and faith, 
 from the dictation of an individual, who made 
 light of the ancient succession of the ministry, 
 and declared the venerable Creed of Nice to be 
 a frigida cantilena. All this, however, Mr. 
 Goode forgets, when he assumes that the theory 
 of Calvinism is the basis on which he may re- 
 construct the religious system of the Church of 
 England. He assumes, in the face of all evidence, 
 not only that Calvinists modified our services, 
 but created them. Give him his standing-ground, 
 and no doubt he may shake the whole world of 
 our Theology, and bring down upon our heads 
 the whole fabric, which God's Providence has 
 raised upon such noble pillars. 
 
 4 Scott's " Reply to Laurence," p. 48. 
 
20 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The conclusion, then, that the Church of Eng- 
 land cannot have designed to retain the Baptis- 
 mal doctrines and offices of the ancient Church, 
 because she harmonized with the Swiss Reformers 
 (which is the sum of Mr. Goode's reasoning), 
 may be exchanged for the following conclusion — 
 the Church of England cannot have harmonized 
 perfectly with the Swiss Reformers, because she 
 retained the Baptismal doctrines, and in part even 
 the baptismal offices of the ancient Church. And 
 this is a position which the course of events 
 renders it more easy, as well as more important, 
 to defend. It was not unnatural that an affection 
 for the country of their temporary adoption, 
 should have induced the Marian exiles to sup- 
 pose that the system of their own Church was 
 identical with that, under which they had en- 
 joyed protection. This they expressed in lan- 
 guage, to which Mr. Goode refers as of great 
 moment. But how is it possible to maintain this 
 opinion, now that its falsehood has been proved 
 by the result ? Whatever notion may have been 
 entertained even in the last generation, yet now 
 that the French revolution has unloosed that sys- 
 tem of coercion, by which Europe was held toge- 
 ther, the tendency of Continental Protestantism 
 cannot be mistaken. The hot fit of enthusiasm 
 has passed away, and the true enemy of the Cross 
 of Christ, the chilling apathetic torpor of an In- 
 fidel Apostacy, is becoming every day more im- 
 minent. Already are the deadly forms of unbelief 
 apparent around us. And from what quarter do 
 they arise ? They refer for their authority to the 
 very maxims, which were introduced with other 
 
INTRODUCTION. 21 
 
 ends by the Continental Reformers ; and their 
 favourite haunts are the very places which Piety 
 and Faith were supposed to have chosen for their 
 perpetual homes. This is surely an inauspicious 
 moment for abandoning those ancient doctrines, 
 which have descended to us from Primitive 
 times ; and for reconstructing our theological 
 system upon the basis of that Calvinistic element 
 which is said to have been intruded into it. For 
 why is it, save through God's blessing on these 
 very doctrines, that the Inspiration of Scripture is 
 not disbelieved in England, as among the Pro- 
 testants of the Continent ; or that our Universities 
 still teach that mystery of the Trinity, which has 
 been banished from the pulpits of Geneva ? We 
 are secured, therefore, against the system of Cal- 
 vin, by observing its effects ; we shrink from ad- 
 mittingpropositions to be theoretically true, which 
 have been shown to be false by their consequences. 
 By this feeling only is the present writer induced 
 to interfere in this controversy. Those great men 
 w T ho advocated the Church's doctrines in other 
 generations seem to have entertained different 
 apprehensions. Baptismal Regeneration was re- 
 garded by many of them as a safeguard against 
 that excessive ethusiasm, which they supposed 
 to be the prevalent danger. But were this the 
 main reason for asserting the reality of Sacra- 
 mental gifts, it would be superfluous to vindicate 
 them. For whatever dangers may be apprehended 
 on the side of enthusiasm, it is so little consonant 
 to the spirit of the times, that it were better to 
 address ourselves to the cure of more pressing 
 evils. The question at issue in the present day 
 
22 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 is the reality of Our Lord's mediation ; the truth 
 of that system of spiritual influences, which was 
 bestowed by the re-creation of man's race in the 
 Person of the. Son of God ; and that whole doc- 
 trine of Grace, which is characteristic of the 
 Gospel. If it should be true, as was always be- 
 lieved in ancient times, and as will be stated in 
 these pages, that "sacraments are the extension ot 
 the Incarnation ;" that through their agency the 
 Son of God effects that great work, which He took 
 our nature to discharge, it will not seem surprising 
 that where the sacramental system has been under- 
 valued, those great truths to which it bears such 
 near relation, should also be forgotten. Hence is 
 a true belief in Baptismal grace as intimately allied 
 in theory to the doctrines of Atonement and ot 
 Mediation, as history shows that they have been 
 practically connected. To this point it is then 
 that I would especially call attention in the pre- 
 sent work. I propose 
 
 First — to set forth that doctrine of Holy Bap- 
 tism, which the Church of England has received 
 from ancient times. Whatever may be supposed 
 to be her estimate of Calvinism ; the existence of 
 a distinct theory of Holy Baptism is an inde- 
 pendent fact which cannot be disputed. 
 
 Secondly — I shall point out, that the doctrine 
 of Divine Decrees is not really inconsistent with 
 the primitive doctrine of Baptism ; and that there 
 is a certain point, up to which even the language 
 of Calvin may be employed, without entrenching 
 upon it. So that there exists no reason why 
 theories respecting the secret counsels of God 
 
INTRODUCTION. 23 
 
 should indispose men to believe His general 
 promises. 
 
 But then I shall show thirdly — that, as a matter 
 of fact, the Calvinistic system was not adopted 
 by those persons, by whom our Formularies were 
 constructed. 
 
24 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 The order which I propose to adopt in the fol- 
 lowing remarks, is first, to consider what regene- 
 ration is; and then, what is taught by Holy 
 Scripture, and by the Church, respecting the 
 manner of its communication. This will lead to 
 the inquiry how far Baptismal Regeneration is 
 of practical importance ; and whether its admis- 
 sion is compatible with the principles of Cal- 
 vinism. 
 
 At present, then, I ask what is meant by Re- 
 generation ? It has always been understood to 
 refer to some gift of grace bestowed by God, the 
 result whereof, is the renewal of man's nature. 
 So that it has reference plainly to two parties ; 
 God, who bestows grace, and man, who receives 
 it. And, therefore, its full explanation must 
 involve the consideration of both. In what way 
 does God bestow grace ? In what way is man 
 its receiver? Let these two points be deter- 
 mined, and a definition of Regeneration will be 
 attained. 
 
 In what way, then, does God bestow those gifts 
 of grace, which avail for the renewal of man's 
 nature ? They are expressly stated to be bestowed 
 through the mediation of Our Lord's Humanity. 
 " There is one God, and one Mediator between 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 25 
 
 God and men, the Man Christ Jesus." 1 This is 
 the manner in which divine gifts flow forth into 
 the world. "As long- as I am in the world, I am 
 the light of the world." 3 For "this is the record, 
 that God hath given to us eternal life, and this 
 life is in His Son." 3 Not only is the intervention 
 of the Son of Man the only channel through which 
 the prayers of man can ascend to God, (because 
 pardon and access have been purchased through 
 the sufferings of the only perfect possessor of 
 Adam's being,) but through this road is it specifi- 
 cally declared that the gifts of God find their way 
 to the creature. " If through the offence of one 
 many be dead, much more the grace of God, and 
 the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus 
 Christ, hath abounded unto many." 4 
 
 And this system of mediation is declared to be 
 a new way, by which the old way of nature is 
 superseded. For an old mode of intercourse there 
 was, whereby, according to the constitution of 
 nature, man was designed to receive gifts from 
 God. In what this old mode of intercourse origin- 
 ally consisted is not revealed, but something we 
 may learn of it from those traces which it has left 
 in man's nature. For this first intercourse with 
 God was plainly connected with that creation of 
 man in God's image, which was the primary law 
 of his being. And there are two ways in which 
 this original composition of man has left its effect 
 upon his present nature. The first is the existence 
 of conscience ; the possession, that is, on the part 
 of man, of a certain inherent judgment respecting 
 
 1 1 Tim. ii. 5. * 1 John v. 11. 
 
 2 John ix. 5. 4 Rom. v. 15. 
 
 3 
 
26 WHAT REGENERATION IS, 
 
 right and wrong. Such a rule of judgment could 
 nave no authority, unless it rested on that main 
 law of man's nature, which has his origin in God's 
 image reflected in the creature's mind. St. Paul 
 speaks of it as " the work of the law written in" 
 men's "hearts." 5 And St. John tells us that it 
 was not a law, the perpetual maintenance where- 
 of had been trusted only to human powers : it was 
 preserved by the abiding influence of that all- 
 pervading Word, who never totally forsook the 
 beings which He had created. This was that 
 Word or creative wisdom, of which we read that 
 " My delights were with the sons of men." And 
 its influence is declared to have been the illumi- 
 nating principle in the world of nature. "In Him 
 was life, and the life was the light of men." 
 
 Now the result of this partial perpetuation in 
 man of his Maker's Image, was the preservation 
 likewise of a measure of that intercourse with 
 God, which in the first instance had doubtless 
 oeen full and unrestricted. That we are able to 
 hold intercourse with our brethren, results from 
 that identity of nature between us and them, 
 whereby we and they are capable of interchang- 
 ing our ideas, and the thoughts of one man are 
 capable of being estimated by another. Even so 
 was the power of holding intercourse with God a 
 consequence of that formation of man in God's 
 image, which transferred into him an intellectual 
 mind and a moral nature. And if the intellect be 
 found to survive even in bad men, yet it cannot 
 reach its proper perfection without the develop- 
 
 5 Rom. ii. 15. 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 27 
 
 ment of that moral principle, with which it has a 
 common origin. But that the two together — the 
 mind at large — -regarded both in this moral and 
 intellectual capacities, has some peculiar mode 
 of holding intercourse with its Maker, is directly 
 witnessed by its own consciousness, and is con- 
 firmed by the Holy Scriptures. For what w r as se- 
 cret prayer, as a rite of heathen religion, but the 
 intuitional reaching forth of the mind after its in- 
 visible Creator ? It showed a conviction that the 
 thoughts of our minds are present as a perpetual 
 object to the Supreme Intelligence. And the same 
 feeling is often evidenced at the present day, in 
 those who undervalue Christian ordinances. " I 
 need no public worship " a man says, "for I can 
 walk forth into the open field, or lonely valley, 
 and there my soul rises up to my Maker, and I 
 apprehend His present influence on my mind." 
 This cannot be denied to be a natural feeling, 
 and if we could be saved by nature, nothing more 
 could be desired. It is to recognize the fact that 
 the mind is the appointed channel, through which 
 man was designed to hold immediate intercourse 
 with God. And this principle is confirmed by those 
 passages of scripture, which speak of the spirit of 
 man as though capable of direct communication 
 with other spiritual intelligences, whether good or 
 evil. "Ananias, why hath~Satan filled thy heart ?" 
 And so we read that "the Lord stirred up the 
 heart of Cyrus king of Persia." And the same 
 conclusion follows from the activity of the men- 
 tal powers, while the bodily organs are dormant. 
 "A thing was secretly brought to me, and mine 
 ear received a little thereof. In thoughts from the 
 
28 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 visions of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon 
 
 men Then a spirit passed before my face." 5 
 
 All this is the admission of a great truth, that 
 the mind is an open door, whereby we commu- 
 nicate with the Invisible. And this intercourse is 
 built upon that all-pervading action of the Eternal 
 Word, which was the original light of our being. 
 And since " all good gifts and all perfect gifts 
 are from above," we may be assured that from His 
 influence, whether through the seeds which He has 
 inspired, or through the power whereby He fosters 
 them, comes all the good which the system ot 
 nature can display. This then is the old road ot 
 nature ; this the channel, through which light was 
 originally transmitted from God to man. Now the 
 law of mediation is the substitution of a new 
 channel of intercourse instead of this old one. The 
 law of grace is given in place of the law of nature. 
 The old door of access had been shut or obstructed 
 by sin ; therefore in the Manhood of Christ was a 
 new door opened to mankind. This is that " new 
 and living way, which He hath consecrated for us, 
 through the veil, that is to say His flesh." The 
 Gospel, therefore, is the disco very of that new mean 
 of approach to God, whereby the old method of 
 approach was superseded. Its publication is the 
 history of that great change, by which this new law 
 of communion with God was substituted for that 
 which had been bestowed upon Adam at his 
 creation. It is the history of the gift of grace. 
 For of grace, wherby is meant GooVs love in action, 
 we hear but little comparatively in the Old Testa- 
 ment, and that little is connected generally with 
 6 Job iv. 15. 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 29 
 
 those typical rites, whereby the minds of men were 
 carried onward to the coming Saviour. With the 
 Gospels begins the further dispensation" of grace. 
 Yet in the Gospels we read of no general gift ot 
 grace to mankind : its season was not yet arrived : 
 the womb of time was still pregnant with the gift 
 which was to ennoble the whole human family. 
 What then do the Gospels say of grace ? They 
 speak of its communication to that heir of man's 
 race, to that representative of humanity, in whom 
 those spiritual blessings were still gathered toge- 
 ther, which were soon to be diffused throughout 
 His brethren. Every mention of grace in the 
 Gospels refers to its communication to the Man 
 Christ Jesus, the One Mediator, in whom were 
 concentrated those gifts, which He afterwards 
 imparted to mankind. " The child grew — and the 
 grace of God was upon Him !" " And we beheld 
 His glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the 
 Father, full of grace and truth." The Gospels 
 then speak of grace, not as bestowed on humanity 
 at large, but on the Humanity of Christ. For it 
 was the appointment of Infinite Wisdom that this 
 gift was not bestowed from Him to others, till 
 humanity had first been perfected in Himself. " It 
 became him, for whom are all things, and by 
 whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto 
 glory, to make the Captain of their salvation per- 
 fect through sufferings. " Though the Humanity 
 of the Second Adam had by nature been pure 
 from spot, yet was suffering the appointed course 
 through which it was perfected for the work of 
 mediation. " For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that 
 they also might be sanctified through the Truth." 
 3* 
 
30 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 Thus did that Manhood, which was taken in the 
 Virgin's womb, become a meet instrument for 
 leavening the whole mass of corrupted nature. And 
 this work being perfected, we see the new Adam, 
 who like His earthly predecessor " had been made 
 a little lower than the angels, crowned through the 
 suffering of death with glory and honour." And 
 then did " He ascend up on high, and having led 
 captivity captive, gave gifts unto men." That 
 which He had received because He was human, 
 He had power to give because He was Divine. 
 Thus did He bestow upon all His members that 
 gift of grace, which had hitherto centred in Him- 
 self. Therefore do we read for the first time re- 
 specting our Lord's disciples, " great grace was 
 upon them all." In this manner was the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost, which had hitherto had its dwelling in 
 the New Head of humanity, bestowed upon His Body 
 of the Church. The love of God had flowed forth 
 into the Manhood of the Incarnate Son, that thence 
 it might diffuse itself through His brethren. 
 
 This law of mediation is recognized in all those 
 Doxologies which the Apostles communicated to 
 the Church. They taught men to speak of the 
 grace of Christ, not of the grace of the Spirit, be- 
 cause it was the Second, not the Third Person of 
 the Ever-blessed Trinity, who became the Incar- 
 nate Mediator from whom Divine gifts were 
 transmitted to His earthly brethren. Such state- 
 ments do not derogate from the work of the 
 Blessed Spirit, nor detract from His Personality: 
 they only reveal that law whereby it has been 
 His good pleasure to regulate His dealings with 
 mankind in the economy of grace. For the office 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 31 
 
 which God the Holy Ghost was pleased to dis- 
 charge in this work of mercy, was to be the agent 
 whereby men might be joined to that Manhood of 
 the Son, which was the appointed channel of 
 graces. As this work, therefore, had its beginning 
 in the Father's love, so was the consecration of 
 the Son's Humanity its second stage, and the 
 communication of His hallowed manhood by the 
 power of the Holy Ghost was its consummation. 
 " The grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and the 
 love of God, and the communion of the Holy 
 Ghost, be with you all." Such is the course 
 w r hereby God is pleased to bestow those gifts 
 which regenerate mankind. This is the new 
 channel of intercourse which had been opened to 
 us in Christ. When the old road of nature had 
 been dammed up by sin, this w T as provided in its 
 stead. Through the manhood of Christ is this 
 blessing extended to mankind. Thus do divine 
 gifts enter into humanity. Their beginning was 
 " God in Christ reconciling unto Himself the 
 world ;" their end is " Christ in" us, " the hope 
 of glory." 
 
 But to turn to the other question : how does 
 man receive the gifts of grace ? Now, w r hen scrip- 
 ture tells us in what manner God bestows His 
 gifts, it tells us also in what manner man receives 
 them. The channel through which God bestows 
 them, must of necessity be the same through 
 which they are received of mankind. Since in 
 the manhood of Christ are centred all the bless- 
 ings of Mediation, from the manhood of Christ 
 must they emanate. To admit this is but to re- 
 cognize that great truth, which is everywhere set 
 
6% WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 forth in Holy Scripture, that the Gospel was not 
 the mere publishing of a new Law, but the be- 
 stowing of a new Creation. " If any man be in 
 Christ he is a new creature, old things are passed 
 away, behold all things are become new." For 
 herein did the true heir of man's race differ from 
 all other teachers either of a true or false Theo- 
 logy. Their object has been either truly or pro- 
 fessedly to reveal God's will, and to quicken 
 those capacities whereby men obey it. But He 
 who was himself the way, the truth, and the life, 
 in whom dwelt all the Godhead bodily, did not 
 come merely to stimulate men's powers or to aug- 
 ment their knowledge, but to reconstruct the very 
 foundations of humanity in Himself. Thus are 
 His brethren u complete in Him, which is the 
 Head of all principality and power."? 
 < If we look, then, at " the Man Christ Jesus," 
 as that "one Mediator" through whom gifts are 
 received by men, we find Him revealed to be the 
 New Head of Man's race, "the beginning of the 
 Creation of God," " the first-born of every crea- 
 ture." This character pertains to Him, not in 
 order of time but in order of relation. For in 
 order of time He had been preceded by the crea- 
 ture, whom himself had fashioned ; but when 
 " the fulness of time was come," He who had 
 made all things as The Wo)*d, took our flesh that 
 He might re-make it as Mediator. He who by 
 nature was "before all things, and by whom all 
 things consist," vouchsafed to be " the Head of 
 the Body, the Church ; that in all things He might 
 
 'Col. ii. 10. 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 33 
 
 have the pre-eminence." Thus did He, who 
 filled all things by nature, vouchsafe in respect of 
 His earthly being to receive that as a gift which 
 pertained to Him by inheritance. li It pleased the 
 Father that in Him should all fulness dwell." 8 
 Thus did He become the Second Adam, in whom 
 the deep foundations of humanity were again con- 
 structed. So that through Him and in Him do 
 men receive that gift, w T hich by him God bestowed 
 upon his creatures. " For if, by one man's of- 
 fence death reigned by one ; much more they 
 which receive abundance of grace and of the gift 
 of righteousness shall reign in life by one Jesus 
 Christ."" 
 
 Now, that we may understand more complete- 
 ly what it is which men receive in Christ, we 
 must bear in mind, what is that mysterious nature 
 of which they are the inheritors. We find, then,. 
 in every child of Adam certain appetites, affections, 
 and intellectual powers. What they are it is not 
 to our purpose to inquire, but they are plainly 
 numerous and dissimilar. And they are bound 
 together, not merely by their allianceto that ma- 
 terial structure, which is called the Body, but by 
 some unknown principle of Personality, by reason 
 whereof this complicated mass can in each case 
 be dealt with as an individual being. But though 
 thus inherent in individuals, these appetites, af- 
 fections, and powers, are not a mere accidental 
 adjunct to the man who exhibits them. For they 
 make up his nature — the possession of them is 
 the link which, more than ought else, binds him 
 
 8 Col. i. 17— 19. s Rom. v. 17. 
 
34 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 to his species ; they re-appear in every type of 
 the class, and their relation to the common race 
 gives them an especial claim to attention. This 
 may be seen by the appeal which is continually 
 made to the judgment of the race, as giving au- 
 thority to some individual conviction. When it is 
 said that ingratitude is universally felt to be a 
 crime, what is this but to refer to the judgment 
 of mankind at large respecting a certain class of 
 actions ? And on this principle depend the whole 
 of what may be called our intuitive powers. Their 
 validity rests upon their relation to that common 
 nature of our race, which refers them to God's 
 voice speaking through that constitution which 
 He bestowed upon our first parent ; and not to 
 the mere caprice of individual inconsistency. 
 
 Now, when man's race is said to have been re- 
 constructed ; the change spoken of is not one 
 which at the time affected every individual, ex- 
 cept so far as it affected that common nature, 
 which was borne by the Head as well as by the 
 members, and which admitted therefore of recon- 
 struction in Him. How this change was to be ex- 
 tended to others ; by what means, and under what 
 law, childern are born to the Second Adam, shall 
 be stated in the next Chapter : the question now 
 before us is the change itself; that re-creation of 
 our common nature which was effected in Christ, 
 whereby man became the recipient of those gifts of 
 grace which God bestowed through his mediation. 
 And here the thing to observe is, that the alteration 
 must have been one which affected all the parts 
 of man's common nature; whereby their consti- 
 tution was changed, and their objects altered. 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 35 
 
 Take first the affections and intellectual powers. 
 On these depends the exercise of love and faith. 
 Both love and faith are principles inherent in 
 man's nature, and were exercised in reference to 
 those realities which have always been around 
 him. But the love and faith of Christians have not 
 only been re-fashioned through the agency of 
 those gifts of grace which were bestowed on 
 humanity in the Mediator, the objects also with 
 which they are conversant are other than were 
 offered to them before. They were God's gift to 
 the natural man ; they are God's gift through the 
 Mediator. Their object was the Parent Spirit of 
 the Universe; their object is God in Christ, re- 
 conciling to himself the world through the Incar- 
 nate Son. To believe in the Gospel is not merely 
 to appreciate the wisdom of its laws, and the ex- 
 cellence of its examples — it is not merely to re- 
 verence Christ, because He first taught the lessons 
 of universal philanthropy, and exhibited in His 
 Person a purity which was never equalled — all 
 this is to believe in Christianity, not in Christ ; it 
 is to recognize the excellence of the Gospel, not 
 to have a saving faith in the Mediation of the Son 
 of God. Faith in Christ is that exercise of the 
 faculty of belief which is not only a Divine gift 
 transmitted through the Mediator to His brethren, 
 but which apprehends Him as the God-man, whose 
 sacrifice is the only satisfaction, His grace the 
 only remedy for human ills. It is to believe that 
 truth, goodness, and grace have flowed forth 
 through this channel from above, and that only 
 through the New Head of our race are they to 
 be received by mortals. And so is it likewise re- 
 
36 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 specting the love of God, which under the system 
 of nature might have expended itself on the ab- 
 stract excellencies of the first Great Cause, but 
 which must now find its object in that manifes- 
 tation of God. in the flesh, through whom only it 
 can travel upwards to the Eternal Father. 
 
 So much respecting the intellect and affections 
 of mankind. But are these the only parts of man's 
 nature which require to be reconstructed ? Must 
 he not be wholly reformed ? For was he not 
 wholly fallen ? As wide surely as Adam's sin, 
 must be Christ's mediation. Is not the degeneracy 
 inherited from our first parent more expansive in 
 its influence than the affections and understanding 
 of man ? Does it not reach to his appetites also ? 
 Are they not perverted, clamorous, excessive ? Is 
 not this to be seen in cases in which the under- 
 standing is not developed ? Did not " death 
 reign from Adam to Moses, even over them that 
 had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's trans- 
 gression ?" Infancy would otherwise surely be 
 free from those pangs, to which at present it is so 
 peculiarly obnoxious. There must certainly be some- 
 thing in man which is capable of reconstruction, 
 independently of those powers of reasoning and 
 those affections of the heart, which are employed 
 in our riper years on the realities of religion. For 
 not only do infants show by their sufferings that 
 they are "by nature children of wrath," but the 
 Apostle declares them capable of being translated 
 into a different state. " Else were your children 
 unclean, but now are they holy." It is plain, there- 
 fore, that the whole of man not only needs recon- 
 struction in Christ, but is susceptible of it. The 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 37 
 
 new creation extends to it all. All the parts of 
 that common nature which is borne by every child 
 of Adam, were re-fashioned in the Head and model 
 of the Christian family, that the renewal of our 
 nature in Christ might extend likewise to them all. 
 And has their object been attained ? Is man thus 
 perfectly restored in Christ ? Such will doubtless 
 be the case with that Church of the elect, in which 
 hereafter will be developed the full privileges of 
 the Gospel. Into that state shall enter nothing 
 which offends, nor any that do iniquity. But in 
 the present condition of things, until the resurrec- 
 tion of the just and the unjust, such a consumma- 
 tion is prevented by two circumstances. For, first, 
 though a new nature has been bestowed on man in 
 Christ, yet the old one has not been extinguished. 
 The " corruption of nature doth remain, yea in 
 them that are regenerate." We read, indeed, that 
 " they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, 
 with the affections and lusts." Yet is crucifixion 
 but a lingering death, by which our members which 
 are upon the earth are only gradually mortified. 
 And, secondly, it is to be considered that in man 
 there is something besides this common nature 
 which has been reconstructed in Christ. For man 
 does not consist only of those appetites, affections, 
 and powers, which are the common heritage of his 
 race. He does not consist only of a certain quantity 
 of these materials, dug out of the mine of human 
 nature, and shaped into that form which is proper to 
 his kind. There is in each man some simple, single, 
 indivisible principle, which invests him with that 
 individuality, whereby he is distinguished from his 
 fellows. There could not otherwise be that re- 
 4 
 
38 WHAT REGENERATION IS. 
 
 sponsibility, which God has stamped upon every 
 child of Adam. For it is this individual being 
 which renders each man an accountable agent, and 
 which thus brings home to himself the awful re- 
 sponsibility of rejecting or accepting the Gospel. 
 Wherein this principle consists it does not belong 
 to the present subject to inquire ; what are its rela- 
 tions to the will and the consciousness, are curious 
 but irrelevant topics ; the point under consideration 
 is that this principle of Personality is something 
 distinct from that common nature, which is re-con- 
 structed in Christ Our Lord ; that let men's oppor- 
 tunities be small as under the law of natural 
 religion, or great as under the Gospel, there is in 
 each case an ultimate principle of responsibility in 
 themselves. Now, unless this responsibility of 
 their ow T n yields to the suasion of the renewed 
 nature, the blessings of the Gospel-gift do but 
 increase their condemnation. " If we say that we 
 have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, 
 we lie and do not the truth." And therefore is 
 it, that belief and love are needed on our part, for 
 the acceptance of that gift of a renewed being, 
 which is bestowed upon us through the mediation 
 of Christ. These graces, indeed, being good, are 
 God's gift ; but they are a gift which does not ex- 
 clude human responsibility; and to which, there- 
 fore, the accountable principle must assent. For 
 where the will of the individual opposes itself by 
 unbelief and impenitence against God's blessing, 
 His streams of mercy lose their saving effect. 
 u The earth, which drinketh in the rain, that 
 cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet 
 for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing 
 
WHAT REGENERATION IS. 39 
 
 from God. But that which beareth thorns and 
 briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose 
 end is to be burned.' ' On this account it is that 
 Repentance and Faith are spoken of as necessary 
 on our part, if we would profit by those blessings 
 which the Gospel bestows. Not that these things 
 are possessed in themselves of a meritorious effi- 
 cacy, Which can give to sacraments a virtue which 
 they do not already contain, or which can supply 
 the place of those actual gifts of grace, which 
 through the One Mediator are bestowed upon 
 mankind. Repentance and Faith have no power 
 of condignity ', as some men's language would seem 
 to imply, to impart to Baptism an efficacy, which 
 by Christ's institution it did not before possess. 
 But the necessity of these qualities is, that their 
 absence from the adult mind is equivalent to that 
 state of repugnancy against the Gospel, which 
 renders its blessings unavailing. And therefore 
 it is that in this state of probation, the blessings 
 of a re-created nature are not only possessed im- 
 perfectly by the best, through the opposition of a 
 conflicting concupiscence ; but by many are alto- 
 gather rejected through the hardness of an im- 
 penitent and unbelieving will. 
 
 The considerations which have been adduced 
 will supply an answer to the question — What is re- 
 generation ? It is the effect of that gift of grace, 
 which the Father of all mercies was pleased to 
 embody in the Manhood of the Incarnate Son, that 
 thereby Humanity at large might be re-constructed ; 
 and which, in Him and by Him, is received by 
 those happy members of the family of man to 
 whom the Gospel comes, and by whom it is not 
 
40 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 rejected through unbelief or impenitence. It is not, 
 therefore, the general influence of the Divine 
 Power, but the gift bestowed through the Me- 
 diator : neither is it the mere promulgation by 
 Christ of a better law, but His re-creating presence. 
 Nor yet is it attained by all men, nor even by all 
 to whom it is offered ; but by those to whom it is 
 given of God, and who do not reject it. It is 
 Christ taking up His dwelling in man. " For in 
 Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing 
 nor uncircumcision, but the new creation ; and as 
 many as walk according to this rule, grace be on 
 them and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE AS TO THE TIME AND 
 MANNER IN WHICH REGENERATION IS BESTOWED. 
 
 The question which I now proceed to ask, is, 
 What is told us in Holy Scripture respecting the 
 time and manner of Regeneration ? Now it will be 
 here maintained, that it is the revealed law of God's 
 kingdom, that this act is brought about in Holy 
 Baptism. But it may disengage the subject from 
 difficulties, if certain consequences are first dis- 
 avowed, which are sometimes supposed to be asso- 
 ciated with this assertion. 
 
 First, no limit is assigned to the sovereignty of 
 Almighty God, whereby He works among the armies 
 of heaven, and the inhabitants of the earth, accord- 
 ing to the good pleasure of His will. The present 
 
OF REGENERATION. 41 
 
 inquiry has reference only to the kingdom of grace, 
 and to the laws and system which it has been His 
 pleasure to reveal to us. 
 
 Again, in speaking of Sacraments as means of 
 grace, it is not implied either that they possess any 
 efficacy in themselves, or that they convey benefit 
 except to meet receivers. For their influence is 
 regarded as Altogether subordinate to the fact stated 
 in the last Chapter, that the motive cause of Re- 
 generation is God Himself, reconciling to Himself 
 the world through the Incarnate Son. So that 
 their outward elements are allowed not to have 
 the slightest tendency to produce those results, 
 which are wrought through them by the immediate 
 power of God. 
 
 Again, as the cause of this efficacy lies wholly in 
 God, so it is fully" allowed that they produce no 
 beneficial effect, if they are opposed by the unbelief 
 or impenitence of the responsible beings by whom 
 they are partaken. 
 
 These questions, then, are not raised — that which 
 is raised is simply this — whether it is God's will so 
 to associate the exercise of His spiritual power with 
 certain external symbols, that where these last are 
 duly partaken, men always participate in those 
 gifts which were bestowed upon humanity at large, 
 through the mediation of Christ. The opinion 
 which will here be maintained is exactly that which 
 is expressed by Hooker : " Christ and His Holy 
 Spirit with all their blessed effects, though entering 
 into the soul of man, we are not able to apprehend 
 or express how, do, notwithstanding, give notice of 
 the times when they use to make their access, 
 because it pleaseth Almighty God to communicate 
 4* 
 
42 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 by sensible means, those blessings which are incom- 
 prehensible." 1 The truth of this statement respect- 
 ing the Holy Sacraments must be learnt from 
 Scripture ; but before proceeding to exhibit the evi- 
 dence in respect to the Sacrament of Baptism, it 
 will be best to notice those antecedent difficulties, 
 by which men's acceptance of the statements of 
 Scripture is really prevented. These difficulties 
 appear to be mainly three : First, the want of con- 
 sonance between the outward media, and those 
 heavenly and spiritual gifts which they are asserted 
 to convey. Man's imagination revolts at the idea 
 that divine powers are so bound to certain apparently 
 trivial, external ordinances, that we can have no 
 claim to the first, except through observance of the 
 second. The notion of cause and effect, indeed, is 
 a primary law of our own minds, but its application 
 is so completely founded upon experience, that men 
 feel an irresistible disinclination to suppose that 
 physical antecedents can be followed by spiritual 
 consequents. 
 
 Secondly — To many persons it seems a sort of 
 sacrilege that any physical agencies should intrude 
 between God and the souls of His creatures. Since 
 external ordinances must in the nature of the case 
 be administered by human instruments, they think 
 that to speak of them as endowed with any real 
 efficacy, is to subordinate "the Lord and Giver of 
 life" to the control of men. Hence it is said, that 
 this notion " banishes the Scriptural truth, that 
 that life-breathing Agent infuses His vital in- 
 fluences into the soul, when, where, and as He 
 
 1 Eccles. Pol. v. 57, 3. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 43 
 
 listeth ; and it limits His new creating power to the 
 moment of application of the Sacramental symbol 
 lawfully administered." 3 And thus " the Spirit 
 would of necessity effect His operation in every 
 infant at the moment when man thinks fit to direct 
 He shall effect it." 3 
 
 Thirdly — Men object that Sacraments do not pro- 
 duce the effect which, if they were really efficacious, 
 could not fail to attend thern. Children who are 
 baptized, it is said, are not different from others, 
 and little result seems to be consequent upon the 
 baptism of adults. 
 
 Now this last, which is the most formidable ob- 
 jection to the reality of sacramental grace, must be 
 met by considering what is meant by the work of 
 man's Regeneration. In its original form this work 
 assuredly was general, complete, and immediate ; 
 but its object was only that Head of our race, in 
 whom manhood was purified perfectly and at once, 
 by the taking it into God. The regeneration of 
 collective manhood was wrought in the instant of 
 .Our Lord's Incarnation. And therefore of the two 
 places in which the term regeneration occurs in 
 Scripture, one refers to the consummation of that 
 kingdom of Christ, of which His Incarnation was the 
 commencement. But when this work is wrought 
 in individual men, what is effected is not the com- 
 plete and instant change of their whole nature, but 
 only the infusion of that Divine seed of a higher 
 humanity, by which their spiritual progress is com- 
 menced. Such a gift does not exclude the action 
 
 2 Gorham's " Examination before Admission to a Benefice."— 
 Introduction, p. xxvii. 
 8 Id. p. 109. Answer, 58. 
 
44 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 of man's own responsibility. It is but to place men 
 in a higher state of trial, by the infusion of a prin- 
 ciple above nature. The new seed must have time 
 to overcome the old principle of corruption ; its 
 existence must be recognized, its growth encouraged. 
 Those who deny Regeneration in Baptism are ready 
 in common to admit that the children of Christian 
 parents are placed by birth in a state of higher 
 Christian privilege than others. Mr. Goode, who 
 denies that Baptism assures us of the salvation of all 
 infants (" dying before they commit actual sin") 
 supposes that respecting the children of really devout 
 Christians, it gives us this assurance. But have we 
 any proof that such children would in their riper 
 years be better than others, if no pains were taken 
 to foster the blessing intrusted to them ? Does not 
 experience show that principles lie dormant in the 
 mind, which it requires fitting occasions to call 
 forth ? .Does not this happen perpetually in respect 
 to the natural endowments, the capacity for art, the 
 faculties of judgment? Do not these often appear, 
 where men have for years shown no signs of possess- 
 ing powers, which are yet only a development of the 
 inherent principles of their being ? And why, then, 
 may not the same thing be expected in the case of 
 that higher nature, which is supernaturally engrafted 
 on the ancient stock of their kind? 
 
 It is plain, then, that on this subject experi- 
 ence will warrant no positive conclusions, till the 
 Church's discipline is more consistent and her 
 course of instruction more complete. While her 
 spiritual ordinances are shared alike by the pro- 
 fane and the holy, it cannot be expected that the 
 people at large will appreciate the sacredness of 
 
OF REGENERATION. 45 
 
 that deposit, with which they have been intrusted. 
 Till education is grounded professedly on the 
 maxim, that the young should "stir up the gift'* 
 which is in them, how can we be surprised if we 
 see it produce little general result ? It is unrea- 
 sonable in those who deny the efficacy of Baptism, 
 to complain of that unfruitfulness which results 
 from their own neglect. What effect do the truths 
 of the Gospel produce upon those who disbelieve 
 them ? And how then can men expect that any 
 general effect will attend baptismal blessings, until 
 there prevails a general belief in their reality ? 
 
 The other two objections rest in part upon the 
 erroneous notion, that matter is less under the 
 control of Almighty God than mind. Now this 
 is to return to the ancient Gnostic error ; to forget 
 that evil had its origin in the region of spiritual, 
 not of material substances, and that the one class 
 is just as much God's work as the other. To 
 suppose that spiritual agents have any power in- 
 dependently of the will of Him Who employs 
 them, would be to exempt them from the control 
 of Omnipotence : to suppose that His power could 
 not be exerted through material influences, would 
 be to limit Omnipotence itself. Why may not 
 words and elements be made the supernatural 
 medium of giving effect to His will, seeing that 
 even the natural efficacy of material substances is 
 derived altogether from His power in whom "we 
 live, and move and have our being?" 
 
 But these objections have their ground in a 
 still more fatal error — a forgetfulness of that great 
 law of Mediation, whereby these two modes of 
 existence have been indissolubly joined together 
 
46 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 For when the Eternal Son took manhood into 
 God, He introduced a new mode of relation be- 
 tween the one and the 'other. Man's original con- 
 nexion with God had been built, no doubt, on a 
 consideration of the Spiritual nature of the Ulti- 
 mate Cause, and of that peculiar relation, which 
 it had pleased Him to establish with the souls 
 which were formed after his likeness. But with 
 the incarnation came a new state of things ; the 
 law of grace w T as substituted for the law of nature. 
 Our ancient intercourse with God has been given 
 back, only through that new founder of man's 
 race, through whom alone we can approach the 
 Father. And " this conjunction," says Usher, 4 
 " is immediately made with his human nature." 
 And this is a conjunction 'which requires, it would 
 seem, some specific media; that so the one may 
 be really, and not only in name, united to the 
 other. Had it pleased God, indeed, He might 
 have moulded every individual by a separate act 
 of his forming Hand. But it was His will that 
 we should bear some common relation to that 
 first father, whose type re-appears in all his child- 
 ren. And when Christ, Our Lord, took the name 
 of the Second Adam, He implied that we w T ere 
 to partake not less truly of that higher Humanity, 
 which was re-created in Him. So that in main- 
 taining the efficacy of Sacraments, we are not 
 trusting to any saving virtue which is inherent in 
 words or elements, but to the work wrought once 
 for all, in the Garden, and on the Cross. 
 
 To object, then, to the system of sacraments, 
 
 4 Works, vol. iv. p. 608. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 47 
 
 as though it limited the spontaneous action of 
 God the Holy Ghost, is to object to a revealed 
 law of the Divine Economy — namely, that it is 
 the good pleasure of God the Holy Ghost, to 
 carry into effect, and not to supersede, the medi- 
 ation of Christ. It is to forget that " the streams 
 of grace must run to us, through the golden pipe 
 of our Saviour's Humanity." 5 And therefore it 
 is to go back from the law of grace, to the law 
 of nature. This is not understood, of course, by 
 those Christian writers who make the objection. 
 But it is openly avowed, when the objection 
 passes into the hands of Socinians, by whom only 
 it can be consistently advanced. For it rests en- 
 tirely upon that primary law of our being, accord- 
 ing to which " the Soul is the specific sense, in 
 which we come into contact with God." d Such 
 w T as confessedly the law of man's creation. But 
 to suppose that the Supreme Being must needs 
 act at present upon this system, is to judge of 
 Him according to that estimate which we had by 
 nature, and not by that which has been revealed 
 to us by Christ. So that to make this principle a 
 ground for rejecting that new channel of inter- 
 course, which has been provided through the 
 taking of manhood into God, would be to rest 
 our hopes upon the right of man's original inherit- 
 ance, and to renounce that new birthright which 
 has been bestowed upon humanity through medi- 
 ation and grace. 
 
 Now r , if men would discharge from their minds 
 
 s Usher's Works, iv. 617. 
 
 6 " The Soul," by F. W. Newman, p. 93. 
 
48 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 those previous improbabilities under which the 
 sacramental system seems to labour, and would 
 follow the guidance of faith in the interpretation of 
 Scripture, they could not fail to be struck by the 
 manner in which Our Lord and His Apostles uni- 
 formly associate the apparently trivial act of Bap- 
 tism with the gift of spiritual blessings. What can 
 be more unaccountable, supposing that Baptism 
 had been only an outward ceremony, than that Our 
 Lord should have put the washing of water promi- 
 nently forward, as a necessary condition of His 
 future kingdom, when he prophetically unfolded 
 its mysteries to the Jewish B,abbi? Why should 
 St. John have been guided by the Holy Ghost about 
 fifty years later, to give this statement without ex- 
 planation to the Church ? Were not men sure to 
 explain it by that Sacrament of Baptism which 
 had already been assumed to convey the new Birth 
 of man's nature ? For was not the passage, as 
 Hooker says, universally understood in this sense, 
 till Zuinglius stated, fifteen centuries later, that 
 he had discovered things which he affirms to have 
 been hidden from all preceding times ? Again, is 
 it not a most striking circumstance, that in the 
 only place in which the regeneration of individuals 
 is spoken of, it should be distinctly asserted that it 
 is connected with the washing of water ? " He 
 saved us by the washing of regeneration and re- 
 newing of the Holy Ghost." It is useless to 
 dwell on such passages, since they are of course 
 familiar to those who take a different view of 
 things. Yet it is impossible not to press upon 
 their attention, that no doctrinal statement re- 
 specting Baptism occurs in Holy Scripture, which 
 
OF REGENERATION. 49 
 
 does not represent it as the medium of grace ; and, 
 still more, that it is repeatedly stated to be the 
 means of union with that Humanity of Christ, 
 which is the principle of vitality to the new nature. 
 " As many of you as have been baptized into 
 Christ, have put on Christ," 7 says Saint Paul. 
 Twice does he speak of men as " buried with 
 Him in baptism." 8 " Know ye not, that so many 
 of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were 
 baptized into His death." 9 And Baptism is de 
 clared to be a work, in which God the Holy 
 Ghost, by whom all Christ's members are ce- 
 mented into one Body in Him, has an especial 
 share. "By One Spirit are we all baptized into 
 one Body." 10 When St. Paul, therefore, met with 
 disciples who professed themselves to know no- 
 thing of the Spirit's work, his first question was, 
 " Unto what, then, were ye baptized?" 11 If, as 
 has been sometimes thought, there was really no 
 great difference between the Baptism of repen- 
 tance, and that which was ministered by Our 
 Lord's Apostles, why should it have been repeated 
 in the case of these disciples ? Further, let it be 
 observed how completely the appointment of 
 Christian Baptism is made to depend upon the 
 spiritual completeness of the mediatorial kingdom. 
 It was when Our Lord's Humanity had received 
 the prerogative by gift, which belonged to His 
 Godhead by nature, that He sent His Apostles to 
 baptize in His Name : " All power is given unto 
 Me in heaven and earth. Go ye, therefore, and 
 
 v Gal. iii. 27. 8 Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12. 
 
 9 Rom. vi. 3. 10 1 Cor. xii. 13. » Acts xix. 3. 
 
50 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in 
 the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
 the Holy Ghost." And in like manner St. Peter 
 tells us that " Baptism doth also now save us (not 
 the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the 
 answer of a good conscience toward God), by the 
 resurrection of Jesus Christ, who is gone into hea- 
 ven, and is on the right hand of God." 12 
 
 Two objections will probably be made to the 
 statements which have been advanced. Itwullbe 
 said, first, that no one denies Baptism to be a 
 means of grace ; all that is denied is, that grace is 
 in any peculiar manner tied to it. Prayer, it is 
 said, preaching, advice, are all means of grace ; 
 and sacraments take a high place among them, as 
 being significent actions, addressing themselves 
 with peculiar force to the minds of men. And, 
 secondly, it will be thought that to lay so much 
 stress on Baptism, to represent it as in any wise 
 identical with Regeneration, is to derogate from 
 the necessity of conversion, and the prerogatives 
 of faith. 
 
 I. The real question at issue, when it is dis- 
 puted whether Baptism is in any peculiar sense a 
 means of grace, is whether it is the appointed 
 means of bringing men into connexion with the 
 Humanity of Christ. For if it be, then since the 
 gifts of grace are bestowed in God's new kingdom 
 through the mediation of the Incarnate Son, Bap- 
 tism must be, as Hooker expresses it, " a step to our 
 sanctification here, which hath not any before it." 
 Now, the onlv scriptural arguments which are ad- 
 
 12 1 Pet. iii. 21-2. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 51 
 
 duced against this position are — first, that Scrip- 
 ture implies grace to be a preliminary to Baptism ; 
 and again, that though Baptism is repeatedly 
 associated with the New Birth, yet that the New 
 Birth is sometimes spoken of independently of Bap- 
 tism. Let us begin with this last assertion : " Who- 
 soever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of 
 God." Here, it is said, a new test of spiritual birth 
 comes in, and, therefore, though nothing hinders 
 that the new birth may take place in Baptism, yet 
 there are other ways which are just as fitting for its 
 communication. The passage which has been cited, 
 affords no real countenance to such an opinion, be- 
 cause the force of the Greek Perfect, which is there 
 employed, is to imply the continuance of the action 
 to which it makes allusion. Its full force would 
 rather be, " Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the 
 Christ, continues in that birth, wherein he has been 
 born into God. 13 But there are, doubtless, various 
 passages of Scripture in which the divine birth is 
 alluded to, but in which no direct reference occurs 
 to the Sacrament of Baptism. Such is the state- 
 ment, " whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the 
 Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in 
 God." 14 Or again, " as many as received Him, to 
 them gave He power to become the sons of God, 
 even to them that believe on His Name." 15 But 
 though these passages contain no direct reference to 
 Baptism, yet neither do they contain the slightest in- 
 timation that the peculiar gift which is associated in 
 Scripture with Baptism, had not been first obtained. 
 Regeneration, as was shown in the last Chapter, is a 
 re-creation of man's nature ; which, beginning with 
 
 13 1 John v. 1. M Id. iv. 15. « j hn i. 12. 
 
52 TIME AND MANNEH 
 
 the Son of Man, in whom it was at once perfectly 
 displayed, is afterwards extended in their manner, 
 and according to their degree., to his earthly bre- 
 thren. When Baptism is said to be the appointed 
 means by which this supernatural change is effected, 
 it is because it is the revealed instrument where- 
 by men are stated to be born into Christ, as by na- 
 tural birth they are numbered among the offspring 
 of Adam. .But though this birth into Christ takes 
 place in that act by which He first gives Himself to 
 man, yet its result must be shown in those various 
 stages whereby men gradually ascend to a perfect 
 conformity with the image of their Lord. This work 
 is not perfected, save by the extinction of that con- 
 cupiscence by which it is obstructed. Although, 
 therefore, Baptism be " to our sanctification here, a 
 step which hath not any before it," 16 yet it has been 
 said that, " setting aside that accident of its being 
 the first, the reason of man shall never be able to 
 pronounce wherein it differs from any subsequent 
 gift conducing to the furtherance of the same 
 state." 17 And hence have some writers 18 spoken of 
 Regeneration as a work which is only commenced 
 in Baptism, and which is not completed till the con- 
 
 16 Hooker, v. 60, 3. 
 
 17 Davison on Baptismal Regeneration. — Quarterly Review, 
 No. 15, p. 504. 
 
 18 Many of our divines, who maintain the doctrine of Regene- 
 ration in Baptism, in its most unadulterated sense, often use the 
 word regenerate, in compliance with popular usage, to signify a 
 man living habitually under the influence of the spirit of grace ; 
 unrcgenerate to signify a man not living habitually under that 
 influence. Still it is to be wished that they had avoided this am- 
 biguity of language, and had kept close to the more ancient and 
 more correct usage of the word. — Bishop Bcihcll on Rcgencra.' 
 Hon, cap. i. p. 9. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 53 
 
 cupiscence of our old nature becomes finally extinct. 
 Such a mode of speaking is not accordant with the 
 usage of Scripture (for " the only place in Scrip- 
 ture that looks at all favourable to the notion of a 
 second regeneration," 19 Gal. w. 19, does not really 
 bear it out ;) yet it is rather an inaccuracy of expres- 
 sion than an erroneousness of thought, so long as it 
 be remembered, that the process whereby men are 
 conformed to Christ's image, must have its root 
 in that appointed means whereby He joins us to 
 Himself. 
 
 And this view of Holy Baptism, as the com- 
 mencement of man's spiritual history, may show 
 the inadequacy of the notion which is sometimes 
 adopted, that Baptism is the extinction of guilt, but 
 not the re-creation of nature. For how can one of 
 those ends be truly accomplished, save by the same 
 act which accomplishes the other? That which 
 leads God to look on our race with displeasure, is 
 not only our share in Adam's guilt, but the " fault 
 and corruption" which w T e inherit from him. It was 
 not sufficient, therefore, that Christ Our Lord should 
 accumulate such an amount of merit by His death 
 upon the cross, as outweighed all men's offences ; 
 it was needful that He should vouchsafe such ac- 
 tual incorporation into Himself, as would give His 
 members a real participation in the value of His sa- 
 
 15 Water land, vol. vi. p. 364. — " Cum ergo sint duae nativita- 
 tes — una est de terra, alia de coelo ; una est de carne, alia de 
 spiritu; una est de mortalitate, alia de seternitate; una est de 
 masculo et faemina, alia de Deo et Ecclesia. Sed ipsa? duse sin- 
 gulve sunt; nee ilia potest repcti nee ilia — Jam natus sum de 
 Adam, non me potest iterum generare Adam : jam natus sum de 
 Christo, non me potest iterum gemerare Christus. Quomodo 
 uterus non potest repeti, sic nee Baptismus." — S. Aug. in Joan. 
 True. xi. quoted by Water/and, Works, vi. p. 317. 
 
 5* 
 
54 TIME AND MANSER 
 
 crifice. " You being dead in your sins and the 
 uncircumcision of the flesh, hath He quickened 
 together with Him, having forgiven you all tres- 
 passes ." 20 Restoration to God's favour is the natu- 
 ral effect of that spiritual birth, whereby the chil- 
 dren of Adam are transformed into the members of 
 Christ. 
 
 But here comes in the other and more formidable 
 part of the objection, which suggests that Scripture 
 asserts, or at least implies, that the gift spoken of is 
 dispensed before baptism, just as much as in it. It 
 follows, which seems to be the view aimed at by 
 those who derogate from the importance, and yet 
 continue the practice of Baptism, that it is only a 
 a sign of profession and mark of difference," instead 
 of being " an instrument," whereby men are grafted 
 into Christ's Body. The passage on which this is 
 supposed to be directly founded, is that wherein 
 St. Peter asks, " can any man forbid water, that 
 these should not be baptized, which have received 
 the Holy Ghost as well as we ?" Yet how can a 
 miraculous interposition of this sort supersede God's 
 revelation respecting His ordinary dealings with 
 mankind ? It is said, however, that we may in- 
 fer as much from what is taught us respecting the 
 pre-requisites for Baptism. How can faith and 
 repentance, the qualities required as a preparation 
 for Baptism, be obtained, save by God's grace ? 
 And if God's grace be obtained, is not the end 
 accomplished which is sought after? That Faith 
 and Repentance being good gifts, come in some 
 way from the Father of lights, cannot be disputed. 
 But if this argument be pushed to its result, it 
 
 20 Col. ii. 13. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 55 
 
 would identify the system of the Gospel with the 
 system of nature. For so far as any good is found 
 in the state of nature it is God's gift ; it results 
 from His influence who was "the li«dit of men." 
 But how wide was the difference when " the true 
 light," — which before had shone " as a light that 
 shineth in a dark place," — came personally into 
 the world. The preparatory strivings whereby 
 He predisposes the hearts of men, are surely dif- 
 ferent from that full adoption whereby men be- 
 come "members of His body, of His ilesh, and 
 of His bones." " He was in the world, and the 
 world was made by Him, and the world knew 
 Him not." This was the state of nature; even 
 in those who were conscious of the previous lead- 
 ings of Him, who never finally forsook the beings 
 whom He had created. And how different this 
 from the full blessing promised to those "which 
 were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the 
 flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." 21 We 
 may conclude, that in Holy Writ an especial 
 blessing is associated with Holy Baptism ; that 
 peculiar blessing, namely, which results from the 
 engrafting of mankind into the Humanity of the 
 Son of God. To those who object to this truth 
 in consequence of their conviction, that before 
 Baptism grace is given, it is enough to reply, that 
 the possibility of gifts before Baptism cannot dero- 
 gate from the reality and importance of that espe- 
 cial gift, which Baptism is appointed to convey. 
 Their private expectation of a blessing which is 
 
 21 John i. 13. 
 
56 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 not revealed, is no ground for rejecting one, of 
 which God's revelation assures them. 
 
 II. To come, now, to the second ground of ob 
 jection, the opinion, namely, that the prerogative 
 claimed for Baptism detracts from the importance 
 attributed in Scripture to Conversion and Faith. 
 This is the main reason of the suspicion with 
 which many good men regard what is called a 
 .high view of sacramental grace. Say what you 
 will they think it impossible to reconcile such a 
 system with the great prominence which Scripture 
 plainly gives to the need of an individual conver- 
 sion of heart; and to the efficacy of a saving faith 
 in Christ Our Lord. Yet the answer to this dif- 
 ficulty lies in a single word. The absolute neces- 
 sity of fitness on the part of the receiver, does 
 not in the slightest degree invalidate the asser- 
 tion, that on the part of the Giver there must be 
 a real communication of heavenly blessings. 
 Conversion and Faith are essential to the efficacy 
 of Baptism on the part of man ; but there must be 
 an actual gift of grace on the part of God. This 
 gift has been, stated to be that re-creation of man's 
 being, whereby in place of the corrupt nature 
 which we inherit from Adam, we participate in 
 the hallowed nature of Christ Our Lord. But 
 besides those common qualities which were re- 
 formed in Christ Our Lord, each man is possessed 
 of an individual principle of responsibility, which 
 has its spring of action within itself. This ulti- 
 mate principle of responsibility — the self-originat- 
 ing principle on which man's accountableness 
 depends — may yield to the good influences which 
 act upon it, or it may refuse to yield to them. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 57 
 
 And its compliance with them is what is called 
 conversion. Conversion is the act by which the 
 accountable principle in man obeys the suasion of 
 those motives, which incline it towards its Maker's 
 service. That from his influence must come what- 
 ever of goodness there is in its choice, does not do 
 away with the fact that in itself reststhe power either 
 of assent or of resistance. And if it finally rejects 
 God's grace, His blessed influences are unprofit* 
 able. So that in an adult, conversion is essential 
 to the efficacy, or perhaps it might almost be said to 
 the completeness of Baptism. Hence St. Cyprian 
 supposed that no real baptism could exist among 
 schismatics, and that upon their conversion to the 
 faith, its outward form ought to be repeated. But 
 the Church finally ruled the matter, as it is ex- 
 pressed by St. Augustin, 23 that Baptism is valid 
 where those things which are required on the part 
 of God, are truly administered, but that its bene- 
 fit does not come out till fitness on the part of the 
 receiver co-operates with the validity of the rite. 
 And this rule he transferred from the case of those 
 who were baptized in schism, to that of unworthy 
 receivers in the Church of God. 
 
 It may be asked, however, whether conversion 
 is to be required of infants ? For if conversion is 
 an essential pre-requisite to baptism, it is plain 
 that infants can be no fit. candidates for that holy 
 rite ; yet so soon as their principle of responsi- 
 bility gains strength, it is plainly bound to yield 
 to the suasion of those motives which incline it 
 towards holiness. And though the name of con- 
 
 22 De Bapt. contra Donat. i. 18. 
 
58 TIME AND MANNER 
 
 version is more exactly applicable when persons 
 have gone away from God's commands, and 
 afterwards return to them, yet it may in some sort 
 be applied even to those, who yield from the first 
 to the suasions of that better nature which is given 
 them. And in this manner does St. Augustin 23 
 observe that conversion may be said to follow in 
 infants, while in adults it must accompany re- 
 generation. 
 
 The absolute necessity of conversion, therefore, 
 in no wise interferes with the reality of that gift 
 of regeneration, which is conferred in Baptism. 
 All that is necessary is to discriminate between 
 that gift of a renewed nature, which God bestows 
 in Christ upon those who are engrafted into His 
 Son, and that principle of individual responsibility 
 which must yield to the Divine influence. And 
 this is still more manifest in the case of faith. 
 For what is religious faith but assent to the decla- 
 rations of God, and appreciation of His nature ? 
 And what is Christian faith but the application of 
 the same principle to that Incarnate Mediator, 
 through whom alone fallen man can approach the 
 Father ? It is a belief, not in Christianity, but in 
 Christ; it is not mere admiration of the excel- 
 lence of the Christian system, but the casting our- 
 selves upon that Personal restorer, through whom 
 Divine gifts flow forth into humanity. Now why 
 should the reality of the gift bestowed, diminish 
 our estimate of the necessity of those qualifications 
 
 23 " In baptizatis infantibus pnrcedit regencrationis sacramen- 
 tum, et si Christianam tenuerint pietatera, sequitur in corde 
 conversio, cujus mystorium prcccessit in corporc." — S. Aug. de 
 Bap. v. 24. Quoted by Waterland. vol. vi. p. 358. 
 
OF REGENERATION. 
 
 through which it is accepted ? The sacramental 
 system is that scheme, whereby the heavenly bless- 
 ings of the Second Adam truly enter the family of 
 the first. Its reality, therefore, is not only com- 
 patible with a true belief, but essential to it. For 
 faith cannot make its own objects; they must 
 exist beforehand in order to be believed. Upon 
 this subject we may cite the testimony of those 
 by whom the importance of faith has not been 
 supposed to be underrated. "Faith," says Lu- 
 ther, 24 " implies in its very nature the existence 
 of something upon which to believe." The reality 
 of Baptism therefore does not derogate from its 
 importance, but only supplies an occasion for the 
 exercise of its powers. This connection between 
 a true faith and a real Baptism is set forth in the 
 Catechism, where one qualification of those wmo 
 receive it is stated to be "Faith, whereby they 
 steadfastly believe the promises of God made to 
 them in that Sacrament." 
 
 But again, w T e must pass from the case of adults 
 to that of infants. Now if faith, it is said, is essen- 
 tial to participation in the blessings of Baptism, 
 how can infants receive them? And no doubt 
 there cannot be the completeness both on the side 
 of the Giver and on the side of the receiver, 
 which is to be found in adult baptism. But is no 
 benefit derived ? For if a condition be absolutely 
 wanting, without which no benefit can attend the 
 ordinance, is it not, as in the case of impenitent 
 adults, a sort of mockery? It is not so consi- 
 
 24 Fallow's "Baptismal Service Illustrated." Pref. p. x. A 
 very useful collection of authorities. 
 
60 TIME AND MANNER OF REGENERATION. 
 
 dered, however, even by those who have most 
 insisted on the necessity of faith. "When the 
 words and the element are combined," says Lu- 
 ther, "it must be supposed to be a valid Baptism, 
 even though there be no faith. For my faith 
 does not make Baptism, but realizes and lays 
 hold of it." 25 And to reconcile this truth with 
 his own general statement of the necessity of faith, 
 he suggests that the seed of faith, its initial prin- 
 ciple, is bestowed by God on infants in the act of 
 Baptism, so that they may in some sense be said 
 already to possess those things, which advancing 
 years should bring to maturity. Such new mo- 
 tives and new inclinations to God, infused in holy 
 Baptism, are stated by Melancthon 26 to be in the 
 place of that full measure of faith and penitence, 
 which is required of adult candidates. Now how 
 is it to be decided whether such a gift is truly be- 
 stowed upon infants in their Baptism ? It is ad- 
 mitted that their powers of recipiency are yet 
 imperfect; it is asked whether those blessings, 
 which are bestowed by the Giver are truly theirs. 
 The question is surely to be decided by the fact, 
 whether infants are meet candidates for Baptism. 
 For if it does not please God to bestow those gifts 
 of which their nature is susceptible, because they 
 are prevented by the deficiency of their being, 
 from exercising such graces as belong to riper 
 years, why should they be baptized at all ? The 
 objection, therefore, is really directed against In- 
 fant Baptism itself. That some changes might 
 befall them even in their present state — that a dif- 
 
 25 Luther's " Catechismus Major." 2G Fallow, Prcf. p. xxiii. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 61 
 
 ference obtains between " unclean" and "holy" 
 children — that it is possible for them to participate 
 in that renewal which Christ wrought in all the 
 powers of man's nature, has already been shown. 
 And if this blessing is not conferred upon them, 
 why are they baptized at all ? Surely it were bet- 
 ter to wait till their conversion could be com- 
 plete, and their faith mature. Since infants, then, 
 are admitted to be proper candidates for Baptism, 
 their involuntary weakness cannot destroy the 
 efficacy of God's grace. His treasure-house must 
 have its blessings for the young, though appro- 
 priate gifts are reserved for his elder servants. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE EFFICACY OF HOLY BAPTISM ACCORDING TO THE 
 AUTHORIZED FORMULARIES OF THE CHURCH OF 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 The meaning of Regeneration has now been con- 
 sidered, and the statements of Holy Writ respecting 
 the time and manner in which it is communicated. 
 The Scriptures, it has been seen, are distinct and 
 unequivocal in declaring that this gift is bestowed 
 in Holy Baptism. Is the same language taught by 
 the English Church ? 
 
 Now, of the two views on this subject — the one 
 exalting, the other depreciating baptismal grace ; 
 those who have advocated the latter have been 
 accustomed to say that the Articles do not compel 
 them to mean more than they are able to accept 
 
62 
 
 Those, on the other hand, who take a higher view 
 of baptismal grace, while it is plain that their 
 system is not excluded by the Articles, have been 
 accustomed to refer to the Service-Book, as a proof 
 that their interpretation of the Articles is the only 
 one which was designed to be admitted. For it is 
 the only one by which the different Formularies of 
 the Church can be made to cohere. But however 
 this may be, the Service-Book is, in itself, a sufficient 
 guarantee of the Church's intentions. It is so to 
 the Clergy, for all those who are beneficed have 
 solemnly declared their assent and consent to all its 
 words. It is so to the laity, for its translation into 
 English has made it a means of general instruction ; 
 and the use of the baptismal Service " when the 
 most number of people come together," implies a 
 plain desire to render men familiar with its state- 
 ments. 
 
 And it cannot be pretended that in her assertions 
 respecting man's regeneration and renewal in Christ, 
 the Church of England is merely excluding certain 
 erroneous principles, without enforcing any definite 
 system of her own. For she is not content merely, 
 as in the case of Purgatory, to object to certain 
 opinions entertained by others : she dwells upon 
 the subject in the Catechism, which she requires 
 every child to learn before Confirmation, and which 
 by the fifty-ninth Canon, every Clergyman is 
 required to teach diligently, under pain of suspen- 
 sion. Even the laity, therefore, may be expected 
 to pay some attention to a rule, which the collective 
 wisdom of the Church takes such pains to press 
 upon them. The withdrawal of those penal statutes, 
 which naturally arrayed the minds of independent 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 63 
 
 men against Church-authority, places it upon a 
 footing more likely to conciliate regard. For if any 
 accordance is to be expected in the interpretation 
 of Scripture, any agreement among men, it must 
 plainly be built upon deference to some common 
 authority. Now what can be so well entitled to 
 attention, as that exposition of doctrine, which has 
 professedly descended from the times of the Apostles, 
 and which has been sanctioned by the affection and 
 belief of the wisest and best men in the intervening 
 period ? Is not this better than the dictum of any 
 individual, under whose influence circumstances 
 place us ? And this feeling ought to be greatly 
 strengthened by the spectacle of that blank infi- 
 delity, which has spread its noxious influence over 
 those countries where the opposite system prevails. 
 And as this feeling may be looked for among the 
 laity, so still more among the Clergy ; who cannot 
 w T ith a safe conscience teach what they disbelieve, 
 nor safely leave untaught what they have promised 
 to inculcate. It could be no relief to them if the 
 Ecclesiastical Courts, as, some have desired, were 
 inhibited from taking account of the statements of 
 the Prayer-Book. Were it enjoined by Act of 
 Parliament that no minister of the Church should be 
 liable to punishment for propounding doctrines not 
 condemned by the Articles, how would such a 
 charge relieve the consciences of those, to whom 
 the words of the Prayer-Book seem objectionable ? 
 Could they, as honest men, continue to use expres- 
 sions which they disbelieved ? Could they promise 
 to teach a system which they intended to contra- 
 dict ? To what purpose should they be excused 
 from punishment for rejecting statements, to which 
 
64 
 
 in the most solemn moments of their lives, they 
 were required to consent ? Or how would they be 
 advantaged by exemption from the control of an 
 earthly court, so long as they were amenable to the 
 more searching tribunal of conscience ? 
 
 It is plain, then, that our Church designs to teach 
 something in her Offices respecting Regeneration ; 
 and that so long as her offices continue unchanged, 
 both Clergy and Laity may be expected to believe 
 them. And what is it which she teaches ? Now 
 we have the confession of a determined opponent 
 that they appear to teach Baptismal Regeneration. 
 By all indifferent persons — by all, that is, who are 
 not members of the English Church, and therefore 
 can look at her from without as uninterested specta- 
 tors — it has always been assumed as a matter of 
 course that the Church of England teaches this 
 doctrine in a uniform, unequivocal, categorical 
 manner ; but even Mr. Goode admits, respecting the 
 Church's Service, that " the expressions evidently 
 favour the notion of their referring to the full bap- 
 tismal blessing." Let us first look at the thing, 
 then, in this light, and see how far its words tally 
 with the view, which even in the judgment of 
 opponents is their apparent signification. That 
 view has been stated in the preceding Chapters. 
 After man had lost that perfection in which he was 
 originally created, his nature received a new begin- 
 ning in that Second Head, in whom all its princi- 
 ples were reconstructed. The Regeneration of 
 humanity, which began when the Eternal Word 
 took our nature in the Virgin's womb, was subse- 
 quently extended, through the power of the Holy 
 Ghost, to all who by grace were made children of 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 65 
 
 the New Adam. Thus was the whole constitution 
 of our being to be renewed. Now, for the accom- 
 plishment of an object which was alien in this way 
 from the course of nature, it was requisite that some 
 means, which nature did not supply, should be 
 adopted. For this reason was the system of Sacra- 
 ments ordained, as being the means, whereby the 
 Humanity of the Word should extend itself to 
 others ; so that men might hereby have the same 
 relation to the Second Adam, which the course of 
 nature gave them to the first. On this account is 
 the gift of Regeneration first bestowed in Holy Bap- 
 tism. For then do we become " members of" 
 Christ's " Body, of His flesh, and of His bones." 
 
 Now, if it be asked in what manner this gift 
 affects us, it must be remembered that it has been 
 shown to imply two parties, a Giver and a re- 
 ceiver. And an inefficacy, which cannot arise 
 from any deficiency in the perfect Giver, may yet 
 be brought about through the defects of the im- 
 perfect receiver. But the defect by which the pur- 
 pose of infinite Goodness may thus be defeated, 
 cannot be only the general fault and defect of our 
 nature, which we each of us inherit from Adam, 
 independently and anterior to the exercise of our 
 individual will. For this defect and corruption of 
 our nature is the very thing which our new na- 
 ture is designed to correct ; and the mere exis- 
 tence, therefore, of the defect, cannot be supposed 
 to neutralize at once the remedy, which is ade- 
 quate to correct it. So that the evil by which the 
 Divine gift is neutralized, must be referred to each 
 man's individual wilfulness ; so that personal ac- 
 tion of his own voluntary powers, which is inse- 
 
66 
 
 parable from his responsibility. Where this indi- 
 vidual wilfulness prevails, it must be met by 
 some especial action of God's preventing grace, 
 overcoming that impediment, which would other- 
 wise destroy the efficacy of His ordinances. Such 
 preventing grace has a peculiar connection of 
 course with the sacramental ordinance, for which 
 it prepares man : it is a gift anticipatory to Bap- 
 tism, and relevant to it ; whereby the individual 
 powers of the adult catechumen may be brought 
 into that state of Faith and Repentance, which 
 may render him a meet recipient for the gift of 
 Baptism. And since this action of prevenient 
 grace does not supersede human responsibility, it 
 can only persuade, it cannot coerce. So that 
 whether he shall profit by the gift of Baptism 
 must still depend, in adult years, upon the state 
 of the responsible receiver. For his individual ac- 
 tion may oppose itself to the efficacy of the Bap- 
 tismal blessing. But, on the other hand, when the 
 individual responsibility is not developed — when it 
 has no power to act one way or another — when 
 nothing has yet come into operation but that ge- 
 neral nature, which we receive in a state of pol- 
 lution, and which needs to be transformed into a 
 state of grace — there exists no power to oppose 
 the Divine blessing, or to interfere between God's 
 goodness and man's wants. For what should in- 
 terfere between them ? Not man's general corrup- 
 tion ; for this is the very evil which God's mercy 
 undertakes to abate. Not man's individual action ; 
 for this has not yet received such development as 
 to be the parent of any result. 
 
 Now, in exact accordance with this state of 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. ' 67 
 
 things, we find two forms provided, under which 
 Baptism is to be administered. The first and in or- 
 dinary cases the common mode, is that which is 
 to be employed before the will and understanding 
 have woke up to individual action. In this case, 
 which is that of infants, there is no room for any 
 thing but the renewal of the general nature. The 
 Church, therefore, describes those qualifications 
 which fit infants for Baptism. The first is that de- 
 generacy of nature which renders this medium 
 needful for their recovery : "Inasmuch as all men 
 are conceived and born in sin." The second is 
 that freedom from actual sin, which renders it im- 
 possible that the purpose of God's gifts should be 
 defeated by their individual disbelief and wilful- 
 ness. " Ye hear in this Gospel the words of Our 
 Saviour Christ that He commanded the children 
 to be brought unto Him ; how He blamed those 
 that would have kept them from Him ; how He 
 exhorteth all men to follow their innocency." 1 It 
 is only by reference to this necessary exemption 
 from actual sin, that we can understand how the 
 term "innocents" can be bestowed upon those, 
 who are tainted by hereditary curruption. Such, 
 however, are they called; and therefore it is that 
 whatever pertains to them is so capable of re- 
 newal, through the reforming energy of the Se- 
 cond Adam, because that individual responsi- 
 
 1 In " the case of infants, their innocence and incapacity are 
 to them instead of repentance, which they do not need, and of 
 actual faith, which they cannot have." — "Waterland, vol. vi. 
 p. 356. 
 
 So St. Austin calls children, " innocentes imagines Dei." — 
 In Juliany/hi, vi. 4. 
 
63 
 
 bility, which might oppose itself to such a gift, 
 has not yet awoke to assert its powers. But be- 
 cause it is essential, that when this responsibility 
 awakens, it should be moulded according to the 
 laws of that new nature, which unconscious child- 
 hood had previously received, therefore does the 
 Church take legal security of the infant's guar- 
 dians, that its awaking consciousness may be in- 
 structed in the nature of that gift, of which it has 
 already been put into possession. 
 
 Now, to this Service for the Baptism of Infants, 
 was added, in a later time, a service for the Bap- 
 tism of Adults. Here the same general framework 
 was retained ; but a marked diversity in the ex- 
 pressions was suggested by the difference of the 
 case. Inasmuch as the individual powers of the 
 receiver had now awoke into consciousness, the 
 blessing of Baptism is stated to be contingent on 
 their due exertion. " Doubt ye not, therefore, but 
 earnestly believe that He will favourably receive 
 these present persons, truly repenting, and coming 
 unto Him by faith." Respecting this condition 
 nothing had been said in the Baptism of Infants: 
 while on the other hand, all mention of "inno- 
 cency" in respect of actual transgression is omit- 
 ted ; and it is stated not only that men are "born 
 in sin," but likewise that " thev that are in the 
 flesh cannot please God, but live in sin, commit- 
 ting many actual transgresssions." And then 
 follow those direct and explicit declarations of 
 the regeneration of the baptized parties, which 
 " evidently favour" the idea, as Mr. Goode al- 
 lows, that " the full baptismal blessing" is con- 
 ferred. For respecting every baptized infant 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 69 
 
 unconditionally, and respecting every adult with 
 the condition which has been already mentioned, 
 the minister is required to affirm that " this child" 
 or " person is regenerate." Now that which is true 
 of every child must be true of all ; for what can 
 be more general than an assertion to which there 
 is no exception ? 
 
 Thus do both these services accord exactly 
 with the notion, that a real gift is bestowed in Bap- 
 tism. This idea is not only favoured by the ex- 
 pressions used, but it harmonizes with them 
 exactly in every particular ; and the very condi- 
 tion which it was essential to introduce in the one 
 case, shows the unqualified truth of that which 
 had been asserted in the other. And the same 
 idea may be traced in all the Church's Services. 
 The Catechism teaches all children to affirm, that 
 in Baptism, they are elected to be members of 
 Christ. In Confirmation the Bishop reminds them 
 that God has " vouchsafed to regenerate" them 
 "by water and the Holy Ghost." In sickness 
 the Priest recalls to their thought " the profession 
 made unto God in" their "Baptism." Those 
 who live in open sin the Church requires her chief 
 pastors to separate from her communion by pub- 
 lic sentence, but when the last sad offices are to 
 be discharged, she bids her ministers to speak of 
 all who have been baptized, and are not excom- 
 municated, as members of her brotherhood. Thus 
 are the positive statements which she makes re- 
 specting infants, confirmed by her mode of deal- 
 ing with her adult children. 
 
 It might seem that these expressions of the 
 Church left no room to doubt what was her inten- 
 
70 the church's estimate 
 
 tion. For here is an affirmation made respecting 
 every infant, and the gift bestowed in Baptism is 
 referred to as important in after-life. All this, how- 
 ever, is held by some persons to be erroneous, 
 because, as Mr. Goode expresses the matter, it 
 involves a u complete pretention of the necessity 
 of qualifiations in infants." His argument is as 
 follows : " In the case of adults we must suppose 
 that these statements were intended only to apply 
 to those adults who have faith and repentance. 
 Why, then, I ask, are we not to suppose a similar 
 and analogous limitation implied in the case of 
 infants ?" Now it may readily be conceded that 
 these, like all other general statements, admit ot 
 limiting conditions, but then the statements them- 
 selves must be shown to be of a kind which not 
 only admit, but require limitation. The strongest 
 arguments which have been adduced against the 
 sacramental system (the little effect which follows 
 Baptism, to which we adverted in the last Chapter ; 
 or the Calvinistic Doctrine of Decrees, which will 
 be considered in conclusion) would here be out 
 of place ; for the present question is, not whether 
 Baptismal Regeneration is true, but whether it is 
 taught in the Prayer-Book. Such general objec- 
 tions to the truth of the doctrine, might be a rea- 
 son for altering the Prayer-Book's words, but they 
 cannot alter its interpretation. What Mr. Goode 
 must do, is to show that the statements themselves 
 are of such a kind, that their very expressions 
 imply the limitation for which he is contending. 
 For example, when the Church is speaking of the 
 state of man in the coming world, here the very 
 language suggests that measure of uncertainty, 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 71 
 
 which is bound up with our notion of futurition. 
 So that it may be observed in passing, that general 
 statements respecting anything past or present, are 
 different in kind from general statements respect- 
 ing what may be hereafter. Thus, when we say 
 " to-morrow will be a fine day," our acknowledged 
 ignorance of the future leads us to receive the 
 statement in a very different sense from that which 
 we would assign to the assertion, " yesterday was 
 a fine day." If a man, possessing the ordinary 
 means of knowledge, deceived us in the one case, 
 we should say he wanted skill ; if he deceived us 
 in the other, we should say he wanted veracity. 
 Now some such qualification, drawn from the 
 nature of the case, must be found in the present 
 instance. For the ordinary laws of language would 
 not allow us to affirm any thing as a general truth, 
 which we have no reason to believe to be so. The 
 condition, though not positively expressed, must 
 in some manner be applied. To assert those 
 things respecting every man unconditionally, 
 which they believe not to be unconditionally true, 
 would be to commit a breach of veracity in 
 Church, which men would not hazard in the 
 market-place. 
 
 Mr. Goode so far feels the force of this reason- 
 ing, that he is not contented to say, as some have 
 done, " we make this assertion of every body, be- 
 cause, though usually false, it sometimes turns out 
 to be true :" he does not mean that occasional 
 truth is an excuse for ordinary falsehood ; but he 
 maintains that he is able to bring forward certain 
 qualifying conditions, by which the general state- 
 ments of the Prayer-Book are actually limited. 
 
72 
 
 And, by way of stating the views of various par- 
 ties, he brings forward three qualifications, the 
 two first of which he himself apparently favours, 
 the third he attributes exclusively to others, 
 These qualifications are, first, " That the effica- 
 ciousness of baptism in infants depends upon pre- 
 vious election by God to salvation." Secondly, 
 M The efficaciousness of Baptism depends upon 
 the prevision by God, of further faith and repen- 
 tance in the child at a subsequent period of life." 
 Thirdly, " As faith and repentance are required in 
 the adult, so they are requisite, in proportion, to 
 the infant, for the reception in Baptism of the full 
 blessing of that ordinance." 
 
 Now, the first consideration which these quali- 
 fications suggest, is, that they involve this im- 
 portant truth, that the benefit of baptism is not 
 merely a change in men's ecclesiastical position, 
 but a real alteration in their nature. Whether the 
 Church designs to> affirm that all baptized infants 
 experience this change, is a further question ; but 
 Mr. Goode may be expected to accord with that 
 doctrine, which her words so obviously imply, that 
 those who partake the inward gift of Baptism are 
 participants of a real and spiritual blessing. 3 And 
 
 2 " For ourselves, as we have often stated, we never could 
 clearly see the scriptural warrant for this distinction between 
 
 spiritual and what is called baptismal regeneration 
 
 We cannot but think that the phrase, "baptismal regeneration," 
 was invented to reconcile the strong terms in which the effects 
 of baptism are spoken of in Christian antiquity, and by our 
 own Church, with the undeniable fact that all baptized persons 
 do not give evidence of having been spiritually born again. 
 We concur with Dr. Pusey, and other writers of the same 
 school, that this notion does not satisfy the strong language of 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 73 
 
 this accordingly he fully admits to be the meaning 
 of our service. " It appears to me," he says, 
 " that regeneration in the full scriptural sense of 
 the word, as implying incorporation into the true 
 Church and Body of Christ, is prayed for, and 
 that the thanksgiving is for the presumed be- 
 stowal of the blessing asked." And in whatever 
 case the words of the Church are truly applica- 
 ble, it seems inconceivable that less can be im- 
 plied in them. 
 
 But when from this consideration we come to 
 the qualifications themselves, we are met by this 
 difficulty, that they are not based, as they ought to 
 be, upon the statements themselves, but only upon 
 a consideration of the parties. For it is at once 
 evident, though Mr. Goode has not adverted to it, 
 that these qualifications are brought out by con- 
 sidering that the blessing of Baptism implies a 
 Giver and a receiver, and that we may consider 
 under what condition the one gives, and what 
 conditions render the other a suitable recipient. 
 God's previous election is a condition deduced 
 from the law according to which the Giver bestows 
 His blessings. u Future faith and repentance" is 
 a condition drawn from what the receiver ivill be : 
 present "faith and repentance" from what he is. 
 So that we are led back to that which had been 
 previously excluded — the external reasons for 
 
 our offices : that regeneration is not an ecclesiastical relation 
 (though baptism includes such a relation,) but a new nature; 
 and that whether we can reconcile the expressions in our 
 offices with this opinion or not, we must not make a new kind 
 of regeneration to meet the supposed difficulty." — Christian 
 Observer, No. 27, 1840, pp. 166, 167. 
 
 7 
 
74 
 
 thinking the Doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration 
 false ; and these have been shown to be no just 
 grounds for assigning to the words of the Prayer- 
 Book any other meaning than that which they 
 naturally convey. These external arguments are 
 no excuse for the Church if she affirms any thing 
 unconditionally, which is only conditionally true. 
 It is needful that her statements themselves should 
 imply at all events that, which they do not express. 
 Mr. Goode seems to suppose that because the 
 Church might have limited her w T ords, therefore 
 he is at liberty to conclude that she has done so. 
 ''Because such general statements refer to the 
 case of adults, as w T ell as infants ; and in the 
 former case it is admitted that faith and repent- 
 ance are necessary to a salutary reception of the 
 Sacrament ; therefore some similar qualification 
 mayhcLYe been held necessary in .the latter case." 
 Here is a plain forgetfulness of the old logical 
 rule, Exceptio probat regulam. This rule does 
 not mean, as often understood, that every state- 
 ment admits of exceptions, but that to admit a 
 particular instance to be an exception, is to allow 
 the truth of the general rule from which it is a 
 deviation. Those who drew up the form for 
 baptizing children, affirmed unconditionally that 
 all baptized infants were regenerate. When a 
 form for baptizing adults was subsequently added, 
 the new condition of faith and repentance which 
 their age introduced, made it necessary to annex 
 a specific limitation. But this limitation does 
 not, as Mr. Goode supposes, destroy the general 
 rule, but establishes it. For the necessity of an- 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 75 
 
 nexing this condition, shows that when it is not 
 annexed, the rule is unconditional. 
 
 The conditions which have been produced 
 would be no justification, therefore, * for the 
 Church's language, but would rather tend to 
 impeach her truth. But let us consider them in 
 themselves. The third condition, drawn from a 
 consideration of the state in which the recipient 
 is, that, namely, of the Infant's faith, is not advo- 
 cated, but only noticed by Mr. Goode. But it 
 requires to be considered, because it acts a very 
 important part in his system. Were this, indeed, 
 a mere question between Mr. Goode and Luther, 
 to whom he attributes the opinion, it were need- 
 less to enter upon it, since we are not concerned 
 with the views of those who are not regarded as 
 authorities by our Church. 3 But by attributing 
 
 3 It may be well to state explicitly on what ground the senti- 
 ments of Luther respecting Baptism are of importance to mem- 
 bers of the English Church. In the year 1523, Luther published 
 what he called "The Book of Baptism, translated into German," 
 " Das Tauf biichlin verdeudscht." This book he did not profess 
 altogether to approve, though he found in it nothing positively 
 censurable; but he states in his preface, "in order to spare weak 
 consciences, I have let it remain much as it was, that they might 
 not complain I wished to introduce a new Baptism." It may 
 be found in German in his works, vol. ii. p. 227, Jena, 1572. 
 This book (either from choice, or by command) formed the 
 basis of the form which Bucer afterwards compiled for Herman 
 of Cologne, a. n. 1543, and the two forms were plainly in the 
 hands of those who compiled our own Liturgy. Now Mr. 
 Goode argues, since Luther employed the same general state- 
 ments which were afterwards adopted in our Services, our Re- 
 formers need not have believed them any more than he did. It 
 is of moment, then, to show, as Luther's words most abundantly 
 establish, that he fully believed in the truth of those general 
 statements, which he copied from the ancient Services. And 
 
76 
 
 this notion to Luther, Mr. Goode gets rid of the 
 otherwise unequivocal language in which Luther 
 had spoken of baptism, and which passed from 
 Lutheran sources both into the Liturgy of Her- 
 man, and into the first Book of King Edward. 
 For since such faith is assumed to require pre- 
 disposing grace, 4 as that of adults confessedly 
 does, therefore Baptism will only be efficacious 
 when it has made use of a prevenient gift of 
 grace already bestowed upon the recipient. But 
 this supposition involves the strange hypothesis, 
 "which Mr. Goode allows " may seem to many in 
 
 this circumstance would prepare us to expect that Cranmer, who 
 published a Catechism drawn from German sources, entertained 
 the same opinion. On this subject, then, and as the translator 
 of a Form which our own in part imitated, the sentiments of 
 Luther are of importance even to those who do not refer to him 
 in other particulars, and on this ground, and this only, is he 
 quoted as an authority in the present work. 
 
 4 Such is Mr. Goode's account of the effect of the view he 
 assigns to Luther, and the same it would seem must be Mr. 
 Gorham's opinion upon the subject. For he states that the 
 " Article does not except infants from the necessity of that due 
 qualification" of faith ; and that it " therefore teaches that there 
 must have been a prevenient act of grace to render such infants 
 worthy" — (Gorham's Examination, Answer, 71:) and again, 
 " as infants are by nature unworthy recipients . . . they cannot 
 receive any benefit from Baptism, except there shall have been 
 a prevenient act of grace to make them worthy," Ans. 15. This 
 seems to imply the exercise of some responsible powers, which 
 prevenient grace is given to influence, for otherwise why 
 should Baptism, which is only the gift of grace, need a preli- 
 minary act, any more than prevenient grace itself does? The 
 only ground on which the necessity of prevenient grace can be 
 rested, is the analogy of adult Baptism; and it is needed by the 
 adult, because his responsible powers require to be prepared. 
 So that the requirement is without meaning, unless there is to 
 be an exercise of responsibility in the infant also. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 77 
 
 the present day singular," that new-born infants 
 possess powers of consciousness of which they 
 give no indication, and are really responsible 
 agents capable of exercising actual faith. For 
 unless Luther's words are to be taken for as much 
 as this, they fail of effecting Mr. Goode's object, 
 which is to show that grace is not in all cases 
 bestowed upon infants in Baptism. To do this, 
 it is necessary to place infant faith upon the same 
 footing with the faith of adults ; and since Luther 
 did not hold the high Calvinistic notion, but sup- 
 posed that the unfruitfulness of Baptism in unbe- 
 lieving adults results not from an Absolute Decree, 
 but from neglect of that preventing grace whereby 
 God is willing to call all men to repentance, 
 therefore the unfruitfulness of infant Baptism 
 must be charged to the infant's own responsi- 
 bility. Such is Mr. Goode's view of Luther's 
 words, " we bring a child to a minister of the 
 Church to be baptized, in this hope and persua- 
 sion that it certainly believes, and we pray that 
 God may give it faith." 
 
 Now, in thus charging Luther with attributing 
 ads of faith to infants, Mr. Goode certainly does 
 not stand alone ; for one of the usual arguments 
 employed against him by members of the Church 
 of Rome was, that his words must needs have this 
 signification ; while the Anabaptists alleged the 
 same statements as an argument against baptizing 
 infants at all. And perhaps Luther's early state- 
 ments were sufficiently unguarded to allow an op- 
 ponent to draw such inferences. But it must be 
 remembered, both that Luther altogether denied 
 that he used these words in the sense which his 
 7* 
 
78 
 
 opponents assigned to them, and also that his 
 language may in some degree be accounted for by 
 the peculiar terminology which had been prevalent. 
 For it had been held ever since the Council of 
 Vienne, that a gift of grace not only was bestowed 
 on infants at Baptism, which had been believed 
 from the first origin of Christianity, but that they 
 received the infused habits of faith, hope, and 
 charity. If it were asked how this consisted with 
 the unconsciousness of the infant mind, the answer 
 was found in a distinction between acts and habits. 
 Of the first, children were allowed to be wholly 
 incapable, but not of the second. Aquinas accord- 
 ingly lays down " that faith and charity depend on 
 the will of men, yet so that the habit of these and 
 other virtues requires the potentiality of will, which 
 infants possess ; but to put these virtues into act 
 requires an act of will, of which infants are in- 
 capable." 5 When Luther, then, in his work on 
 the Babylonish Captivity, was asserting the univer- 
 sality of the principle of faith, he was met by the 
 question of Infant Baptism, and he solved it by 
 saying that the circumstance whereby infants w T ere 
 rendered acceptable to God, was the faith which 
 was infused into them, and not the virtues. But 
 when it was alleged that in this case he must mean 
 to attribute to them actual faith, and thus that he 
 fell into the absurd notion of supposing them to be 
 conscious agents, he altogether denied the charge, 
 and explained his doctrine by the very illustration 
 of the character possessed in sleep, which had been 
 employed by Aquinas. " What scriptural grounds 
 
 5 Summa Theol. iii. Q. Ixix. 5. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 79 
 
 there are for saying, as some do, that when children 
 are baptized they understand the words of the Gos- 
 pel, and have an actual belief in them, and so are 
 saved, I could never discern." Such was Bucer's 
 objection in the conference at Wittenberg. To 
 which Luther replied, " that this was not his 
 opinion or that of his friends; but just as we are 
 numbered among the faithful even in our sleep, and 
 are really faithful, though we have no actual thought 
 of God, so that in infants there is an initial principle 
 of faith, which yet in God's work, acting upon them 
 according to the law of their capacity (a law of 
 which we know nothing,) and that this he called 
 faith. That he had rather no discussion was raised 
 on this subject, nor that any one attempted to 
 investigate in what way God effects this His work 
 in them." 6 
 
 It is plain, then, that Luther did not design to 
 attribute actual 7 faith to children, but bestowed the 
 
 6 Buceri Script. Ang. p. 656. 
 
 7 As this is a point of considerable moment, I will quote the 
 account which is given of it by an author of high reputation : 
 *' The Treatiser chargeth me, that whereas Luther defendeth 
 that infants in Baptism actually believe, I endeavour to wrest 
 his words to habitual faith ; which sense, he saith, Luther's dis- 
 courses will not admit; and for proof hereof referreth the reader 
 to certain places in Luther, and to the positions of his followers. 
 . . . The reader cannot but find by Luther's discourses-, and the 
 doctrine of his scholars, that I have rightly delivered his opinion 
 to be, that infants are filled with habitual faith when they are re- 
 generate, and not that they have any such acts of faith or know- 
 ledge of God, as men of years have. Let us, therefore, hear 
 what Luther himself will say: 'Some men,' saith he, • will ob- 
 ject against that which I have said, touching the necessity of 
 faith in such as are to receive the Sacraments with profit, that in- 
 fants have no faith, nor apprehension of God's mercies, and that 
 therefore either faith is not so necessarily required to the due 
 
80 
 
 name of faith on that spiritual gift which God 
 infuses into them in Baptism. Accordingly, in the 
 agreement which he concluded with Bucer at Wit- 
 tenberg, it was expressly stated that children receive 
 the Holy Ghost in Baptism ; that it is not to be 
 supposed that they understand, but that motions 
 and inclinations tending towards faith and love are 
 bestowed upon them, and that in this sense it may 
 
 receiving of the Sacrament, or that infants are baptized in vain. 
 Here, J say, that which all say, that other men's faith, even the 
 faith of such as present them to Baptism, steadeth little children. 
 For as the word of God is mighty when the sound thereof is 
 heard, even to the changing the heart of a wicked man, which is 
 no less unapt to hear the voice of God, and to listen unto it, 
 than any little babe: so by the prayer of the Church, which out 
 of faith (to which all things are possible) presenteth it to baptism, 
 the child is changed, cleansed, and renewed, by the infusion of 
 faith, or by faith which is infused and poured into it.' Thus 
 doth Luther express his own meaning touching this point. Now 
 let us hear what his followers will say. ' It was agreed upon,' 
 says Chemnitius, 'amongst the followers of Luther' (/. e., at the 
 conference at Wittenberg, a. d. 153d), 'that when we say in- 
 fants believe or have faith, we must not imagine they do under- 
 stand or feel the motions of faith. But their error is rejected, 
 who suppose that infants baptized please God, and are saved 
 ivithout any operation or working of the Holy Spirit in them ; 
 whereas Christ pronounceth, that unless a man be born anew of 
 water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven. So that this is all that Luther and the rest meant, that 
 children cannot be made partakers of those benefits that God 
 offereth to men in Baptism, nor inherit eternal life by virtue of 
 the faith of the Church, without some change wrought in them 
 fitting them to be joined to God, which change or alteration in 
 them they call faith : for they constantly deny that they feel 
 any such motions of faith ; but a kind of habitual faith only, 
 there being nothing in faith, but such an act of believing as they 
 deny, or the seed, root, and habit, whence actual motions in 
 due time do flow.' " — Field's Book of the Church, Appendix 
 to the 5th Book second part, sec. ii. p. 837. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 81 
 
 be said that they have faith. 8 So that instead of 
 regarding faith as a condition of the infant's mind, 
 by which Baptism might be rendered either useless 
 or beneficial, Luther looked at it as only the fittest 
 name for that seminal principle, which he asserted 
 so strongly that Baptism in itself always conveyed. 
 "Some persons," he says, "preach and magnify 
 Baptism, but yet err in that they rest it not on 
 God's command and institution, but on some human 
 work, on our faith and dignity, as if it were not 
 enough that God should have appointed and com- 
 manded it, but it must first be confirmed by us ; 
 and as though Baptism had no existence or no 
 efficacy without the accession of our faith. To 
 this I make objection, and say, whatever be my 
 faith, firm or weak, present or absent, this neither 
 adds any thing to Baptism nor takes any thing 
 away. 9 A similar passage occurs in the Catechism, 
 wherein he says, that " after all, the main force of 
 the matter does not depend on this, whether the 
 child who is baptized believes or no ; seeing that 
 through want of this the Baptism suffers no 
 detraction. For its main point rests on God's 
 appointment." 10 
 
 This subject has been dwelt upon, because it is 
 of moment to show that not a shadow of reason 
 exists for doubting that Luther's repeated state- 
 ments respecting the regeneration of infants in ]3ap- 
 
 s Buceri Script. Ang. p. 668. 
 
 9 Homilia de Baptismo, vol. vii. p. 351. Wittenberg, 1558. 
 
 10 " Deinde hoc quoque dicimus, nobis non summam vim in hoc 
 sitam esse, imm ille qui baptizetur credat necne ; per hoc enim 
 Baptismo nihil detrahitur. Verum summa rei in Verbo ct pr^p- 
 cepto Dei consistit." — Catechismus Major, works, v. 638. 
 
82 
 
 tism, are to be taken in their simple and obvious 
 sense. The only ground for such an opinion which 
 Mr. Goode can allege depends, upon the strange 
 conception which some of Luther's earlier expres- 
 sions had seemed to favour, but which he himself, 
 in later years, distinctly repudiated. Yet, on the 
 strength of this argument Mr. Goode infers that the 
 expressions in the Cologne Liturgy, and in those of 
 our own Church, need not he taken in their appa- 
 rent sense, because they were formed on the model 
 of the Nuremberg Liturgy, which Luther had ori- 
 ginally translated. The deduction would not be 
 legitimate, even if it stood on a solid basis ; but in 
 this case, the foundation on which it rests has been 
 shown also to be utterly illusory. 
 
 So much respecting the third of those conditions 
 for saving Baptism, which Mr. Goode has produced. 
 The other two were — first, a sentence of previous 
 election to salvation on the part of God : and, se- 
 condly, the prevision by God of future faith and re- 
 pentance. And respecting these two it is necessary 
 to say a few 7 words. 
 
 If the first or Calvinistic hypothesis be only stated 
 in express words, its glaring repugnancy to the 
 whole language of the Prayer-Book, cannot fail to 
 be manifest. For take it in any individual case. 
 See some infant lying helpless and unconscious in 
 its nurse's arms, incapable alike of actual good or 
 evil. Its friends pause a moment after bringing it 
 within the portals of the sanctuary, as though con- 
 scious of the risks of life, and almost fearful of com- 
 mitting it to the grave responsibilities which result 
 from dedication to God's service. There they are 
 encouraged by the voice of the Priest, and by 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 83 
 
 Christ's merciful words in the Gospel : " Doubt ye 
 not therefore, but earnestly believe that He will 
 likewise favourably receive this present Infant." 
 Thus invited, they proceed in the service, "being 
 persuaded of the good-will of our heavenly Father 
 towards this Infant." And could we bear to speak 
 thus, if we knew that it was at least as probable as 
 not, that the Baptismal waters were in this case rob- 
 bed of their healing efficacy, not in consequence 
 of any thing which the child was or did, or could 
 do, but because Almighty God, by an irresistible 
 sentence, had decreed to withhold from him the 
 succours of grace, and thereby to consign him to 
 everlasting ruin ? For even if men do not take the 
 full view expressed by Calvin, 11 and suppose that 
 the All-Merciful makes a show of bestowing help, 
 in order to enhance the guilt and misery of those 
 whose destruction He had previously decreed by an 
 arbitrary sentence ; yet the denial of sufficient grace 
 must render the whole language of the service a 
 mockery. 
 
 From the harshness of this supposition men fly, 
 not unnaturally, to the second condition assigned 
 by Mr. Goode, and look for the qualification of Bap- 
 tism, not in the will of Him who bestows grace, 
 but in the condition of him who is to receive it. 
 And since the present condition of the infant is that 
 of unconsciousness, they refer to what his condition 
 will be. According to this theory " the efficacious- 
 ness of Baptism depends upon the prevision by God 
 of future faith and repentance in the child at a sub- 
 sequent period of life." Now it should be observed 
 
 11 " Quia Dominus, ut magis convictos et inexcusabiles red- 
 dat se insinuat in eorum mentes." — Calvin Instit. iii. 2, 11. 
 
84 
 
 that this qualification, if it means any thing, is in- 
 compatible with the other which preceded it. For 
 if those who bring the child have a right to assume 
 that something will be bestowed upon him, pro- 
 vided it is apparent to the foreknowledge of the All- 
 wise that he will hereafter make a good use of the 
 endowment, it follows that the responsibility of man 
 has some part in the decision of his destiny. For 
 otherwise this condition need not be introduced, 
 seeing that the whole question would in reality be 
 shut up in God's predetermining appointment. To 
 dwell, then, on this condition ; to rest on it as sup- 
 plying, in itself, the reason why Baptism is, in some 
 cases, attended by grace — in others not attended by 
 it, is incompatible with an employment of that other 
 condition of God's arbitrary decree, which has al- 
 ready been mentioned. 
 
 The passage in the Catechism on which this con- 
 dition is often rested, shall be mentioned before the 
 conclusion of this Chapter ; at present it need only 
 be said, that it is not open to any one to refer to 
 this condition, if he commits himself to the other 
 condition of Calvinism. To take one or the other, 
 as the occasion serves, is wholly irrational. And 
 this will be found, as will be shown in the instance 
 of Cranmer, to be an error which runs through 
 many of the interpretations w T hich Mr. Goode gives 
 to the words of the Liturgy and of the Reformers. 
 There are two keys, and if one does not serve, the 
 other may be made available. But then the keys 
 belong to different systems, and if the one be used, 
 the other ought to be altogether discarded. For 
 this condition of the prevision of man's future con- 
 duct is, in truth, a part of that Pelagian system, 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 85 
 
 which is as inconsistent with the principles of the 
 Gospel, as the system of necessity is with the in- 
 stincts of natural piety. For it makes man's fore- 
 seen actions the source of that first gift of grace, 
 with which he must start in the career of duty. It 
 makes something, therefore, which may be dis- 
 cerned in man, the moving cause of God's first ad- 
 vances towards him. And this has been long rejected 
 by the Church as a part of the Pelagian hypothesis : 
 it has long been held that the first measure of power 
 to will and to do is God's free gift, although it is a 
 gift which does not exclude man's responsibility. It 
 is strange, therefore, that this condition should have 
 been relied upon by the parties who of late have 
 used it, since if it means any thing, it makes man 
 the original moving cause of his own salvation, and 
 gets rid of the universality of baptismal grace, by 
 limiting it to those cases in which it is purchased 
 by human merit. It will be shown hereafter, that 
 the words of the Catechism do not, as has some- 
 times been represented, involve such a condition : 
 and this single consideration is sufficient to show 
 that they could not do so. For otherwise the Church 
 would be involved in that Pelagian error, against 
 which she uniformly protests. But it is one thing 
 to say that the succours of grace are so dispensed, 
 as not to supersede man's accountableness ; another 
 to say that the condition which procures them is his 
 own excellence. For his last system breaks that 
 golden chain whereby all created beings must de- 
 pend on the Ultimate Source of good as the primary 
 spring of all virtue ; and while the system of Ne- 
 cessity would make man a beast, this would make 
 him a god. 
 
 8 
 
86 the church's estimate 
 
 There is in reality, then, only one point of contact 
 between the two first conditions which Mr. Goode 
 suggests ; namely, that both of them introduce a 
 qualification into the Church's general statements, 
 and thus allow men occasionally to reject that which 
 she asserts, without limitation, to be true. It has 
 already been shown, that the very introduction of 
 such conditions, unsanctioned by the expressions 
 themselves, is a violation of the plainness of speech 
 which, in common life, would be accounted dis- 
 honourable. And nothing can be w T orse than on the 
 most sacred subjects to admit of a conventional dis- 
 honesty. But let us test somewhat further this prin- 
 ciple of a charitable interpretation, which results 
 either from the one or the other of the condi- 
 tions which have been discussed. Let us see 
 whether, if it could be admitted in this case, it 
 would tally with the other parts of the baptismal 
 service. Now T what is the opinion before us ? It 
 proceeds on the supposition that " God may be 
 mercifully present to the child in" Baptism, " but 
 we have no right to assume that such will be the 
 case." Christ works by " ministers, but only when 
 and in what cases He pleases." Out of every hun- 
 dred to whom they administer the Sacraments, 
 there may be very few to whom they minister more 
 than an outward rite or ceremony." This is the 
 necessary result, of course, of the erroneous opinion 11 
 that to conceive sacraments effectual is to subordinate 
 God's power to man's control. The error arises 
 
 11 So Mr. Goode. " It would be making God's best gifts de- 
 pendent upon the course of human generation, for baptism is in- 
 the power of all." And still more clearly Mr. Gorham, Sup. 
 p. 2G. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 87 
 
 from forgetting a rule which even Luther incul- 
 oates, "to be baptized in God's name, is not to be 
 baptized by men, but by God Himself." 13 For 
 God is equally supreme in those things which He 
 does by the agency of earthly, and those which He 
 does by the agency of heavenly, instruments ; He as 
 truly feeds the nations by bread, as He did the 
 Israelites by manna. If, therefore, Baptism be 
 really His appointment, it does not cease to be His 
 own act because He employs the ministry of His 
 servants. But this mistake implies, of course, as a 
 necessary consequence, that the only mean of ascer- 
 taining, whether any one has partaken of the re- 
 generating gift of grace, is by observing whether he 
 is a devout Christian ; and not, as Cranmer says in 
 his Catechism, because " I know for a surety that 
 I am baptized;" "and the Holy Ghost doth wit- 
 ness, that he which is baptized hath put upon him 
 Christ." And hence results the opinion that grace 
 and regeneration are identical : the last not being 
 any particular gift, or attainable in any particular 
 manner. And since the gifts of grace may of 
 course be bestowed by their Giver when and how 
 He pleases, therefore Regeneration may be looked 
 for before or after Baptism, just as well as in that 
 ordinance. And so says Mr. Goode ; " in all cases 
 baptism is connected with regeneration, only as the 
 formal signing and sealing of the deed is connected 
 with the completion of a purchase." " In adults 
 the internal work of regeneration must be at least 
 commenced before parties can properly receive Bap- 
 
 13 Siquidem baptizari in nomine Dei, non est ab hominibus, 
 sed ab ipso Deo baptizari. — Catec 2Ir/j. 
 
88 
 
 tism ; and in infants, it must either be commenced 
 or foreseen by God certainly to follow. " 
 
 The theory, then, of a charitable sense, is that 
 grace of any sort is identical with the grace of re- 
 generation ; that since God bestows His gifts be- 
 fore, in, or after baptism, no means exists for 
 determining whether it is bestowed except the 
 effect ; and that consequently in the case of any 
 child who is brought to baptism, it is charitable 
 to affirm that, which it is impossible to deny. The 
 reader must be reminded in a few words what 
 was that other system, which was before explained, 
 and which assumes that all baptized infants have 
 been regenerated. For the cause of this it refers 
 to the grace of God, which originally took up its 
 dwelling in the Humanity of the Word, and is 
 since distributed through sacraments. Its office 
 is the reconstruction of that common nature, which 
 was corrupted in Adam ; a work which is declared 
 in Holy Scripture to have its commencement in 
 Baptism. In this case the gift is not to be esti- 
 mated merely by the result, but by God's promise. 
 For it is not identical with grace at large, but is 
 that peculiar and separate grace, which results 
 from union with Christ's Body. In adults this 
 process is liable to be obstructed through the op- 
 position of their individual wilfulness : in infants 
 there can be no such repugnancy. In the first, 
 therefore, regeneration is only affirmed to take 
 place, when their will has yielded to the suasion 
 of preventing grace ; in the second, regeneration 
 is declared to be coincident with valid Baptism. 
 Such are the two system ; it has been shown that 
 the last alone accords with the Church's general 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM, 89 
 
 assertions respecting baptismal grace ; let us see 
 whether any other passages in the Service-Book 
 enable us to test their applicability. 
 
 Now such a test may be found by considering 
 what is the Church's mode of speaking respecting 
 those who are not baptized. For since God may 
 plainly bestow His grace before as well as after 
 Baptism, therefore the judgment of charity does 
 not allow us to deny its presence in one case, any 
 more than in the other. Before, as well as in Bap- 
 tism, it is equally charitable to affirm that, which 
 it is impossible to deny. But what is the Church's 
 mode of proceeding ? In the case of adults she not 
 only supposes that they may have grace, but be- 
 fore she admits them to Baptism, she takes the 
 utmost pains to ascertain that they actually pos- 
 sess it. No securities of course can altogether 
 guard against the deceitfulness of the human heart, 
 but where " timely notice" is given to the Bishop, 
 " that so due care may be taken for the examina- 
 tion" of the parties, where they are "exhorted to 
 prepare themselves with prayer and fasting," and 
 finally are " found fit," it cannot be doubted that 
 they must be supposed to come as meet receivers 
 to Baptism. And of course to exhort them to 
 "prayer and fasting," is to imply that they have 
 partaken of some measure of that grace, without 
 which such exercises must be useless. Now if 
 the Church supposes that regeneration is attained 
 wherever God bestows grace, if she judges of it 
 merely by the general conduct, and does not sup- 
 pose it to be associated with any peculiar ordi- 
 nance ; if she thinks that Baptism is only a sign of 
 that gift which God has before bestowed on every 
 8* 
 
90 the church's estimate 
 
 meet receiver, how can she possibly affirm that 
 such persons are not regenerate till they approach 
 the baptismal font ? I waive the fact that after 
 they are baptized she pronounces them regenerate, 
 for this men will attribute to the judgment of 
 charity ; but how comes she to be so wanting in 
 charity as previously to deny them this gift? She 
 has taken the utmost pains to ascertain that 
 they are fit recipients — she has satisfied herselt 
 that so far as human testimony goes, they possess 
 those qualifications which are supposed to imply 
 that the blessing of regeneration has already been 
 vouchsafed, and then proceeds to ask it for them 
 as a future benefit. "We call upon Thee for 
 these persons, that they, coming to Thy Holy 
 Baptism, may receive remission of their sins by 
 spiritual regeneration." 
 
 It is plain, then, that in this case the " charitable 
 hypothesis" is altogether inapplicable. For the 
 Church does not carry it far enough. If this were 
 all which she intended to say respecting the bap- 
 tized, she could not refuse to employ the same 
 language respecting meet Catechumens. 
 
 And it is not unimportant to observe, that 
 though exhorting the candidates for Baptism to 
 previous prayer, the Church does not include 
 them among those whose supplications she in- 
 vokes for the validity of this healing ordinance. 
 She calls on the congregation to pray that " these 
 Thy servants may be received into the ark of 
 Christ's Church ;" but she does not associate the 
 prayers of the candidates with those of Christians ; 
 to the former she says, " ye have heard how the 
 congregation hath prayed, that our Lord Jesus 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 91 
 
 Christ would vouchsafe to receive you." A mo- 
 ment before Baptism she prays, " regard, we be- 
 seech Thee, the supplications of this congregation ; 
 sanctify this water to the mystical washing away 
 of sin ; and grant that the persons now to be bap- 
 tized therein may receive the fulness of Thy 
 grace." A moment after Baptism she says, 
 " seeing now, dearly beloved Brethren, that these 
 persons are regenerate." Now what a mockery is 
 this whole transaction, if the Church has pre- 
 viously ascertained to its own satisfaction, that re- 
 generation had in reality been before dispensed ! 
 For in truth, on what is called the " charitable 
 hypothesis," regeneration can never be supposed 
 to be conferred on adults in Baptism. Not on 
 meet receivers, for they are regenetated already : 
 not on unmeet, for since by the hypothesis they 
 must come hypocritically, they cannot expect a 
 blessing which they do not seek. Thus would 
 the Church be supposed to affirm that every meet 
 receiver was unregenerate before baptism, and 
 regenerated in the act of baptism itself ; while in 
 reality both statements would be false- -the bless- 
 ing would never be bestowed at the time as- 
 serted, never absent when its presence was denied. 
 If we .turn from the Service for adults to that 
 for infants, we find in it, likewise, that the theory 
 of a charitable construction is equally untenable. 
 The ground of its inapplicability in the former 
 case was, that by Regeneration is meant that re- 
 newal of our common nature, which began in 
 Christ, and in Sacraments is extended to His 
 brethren. Since in adults this work may be ob- 
 structed by the waywardness of the individual 
 
92 
 
 will, the influence of preventing grace is needed 
 as a preparation for it. But because Regenera- 
 tion is not identical with grace at large, therefore 
 it is not spoken of as effected, when preventing 
 grace is supposed to be possessed : the judgment 
 of charity does not lead to any such assumption ; 
 but the term is reserved to express that particular 
 work, of which Baptism is the appointed means. 
 Now in exact conformity with this system, we 
 find that the regeneration of baptized infants is 
 asserted because their nature admits of recon- 
 struction, though there is no room in them for the 
 operation of preventing grace ; and we find as- 
 sertions made, and laws passed, which, but for 
 this supposition, ought in common charity to be 
 extended to unbaptized infants also. For it is 
 plain, that the unconsciousness of their age ex- 
 cludes infants from the action of preventing grace 
 upon their individual will. The influences of 
 w T hich alone they can be susceptible, must be those 
 which address themselves to that general nature, 
 from which our separate responsibility has been 
 distinguished. And such a change is plainly re- 
 cognized, when it is said that " it is certain by 
 God's word, that children which are baptized, 
 dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubt- 
 edly saved." With which must be associated the 
 fact, that to baptized children only is allowed 
 participation in the Funeral Offices of the Church. 
 This is not a mere accident, but is a positive rule, 
 founded on those ancient Canons, which declared 
 that those, with whom was no communion when 
 living, cannot be admitted to communion after 
 death. Now what can more strongly mark the 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 93 
 
 Church's opinion, that in Baptism the nature ot 
 the old Adam is exchanged for that which was 
 re-fashioned in Christ ; than her declaration that 
 the salvation of baptized Infants, dying before they 
 commit actual sin, is affirmed in Scripture ? Here 
 is a direct assertion that baptized infants are 
 partakers of that renewal of man's nature, which 
 commenced through the regeneration of humanity 
 in Christ. For what does Holy Scripture tell us 
 of the salvation of mankind, except as dependent 
 on this great event? It every where sets forth 
 this " new and living way," as the only revealed 
 channel of Divine grace. So that when we are 
 told that baptized infants, dying before they com- 
 mit actual sin, are undoubtedly possessors of the 
 Scripture promise of salvation, here is a distinct 
 affirmation that they have undergone that change 
 for which we supplicate, when we say, " Give Thy 
 Holy Spirit to this infant, that he may be born 
 again, and made an heir of everlasting salvation." 
 And here, therefore, we have an opportunity 
 of seeing when the Church uses the judgment of 
 Charity, and when she does not. For we have 
 no proof that God, whose mercies are infinite, 
 may not bestow His grace upon unbaptized chil- 
 dren also. And therefore our Church, while af- 
 firming the salvation of those who have been made 
 members of Christ, exercises a charitable judg- 
 ment respecting others. But she does not speak 
 of them in the same terms, which she uses re- 
 specting the baptized. On the contrary, she does 
 not allow her ministers to use her Burial Ser- 
 vice over their remains, and she studiously ab- 
 stains from pronouncing respecting their state 
 
94 
 
 She leaves ground for hope, where she possesses 
 no certainty. Now this is exactly the position, in 
 which those who deny Baptismal grace would 
 place her in respect to baptized infants. Her 
 words, therefore, respecting the unbaptized, ought 
 on this theory to be the same which she employs 
 respecting those who have received Baptism. Else 
 she is wanting in that Charity towards the one, 
 which she exercises towards the other. 
 
 It is plain, then, that the Church's different 
 treatment of baptized and unbaptized infants is 
 wholly fatal to the idea, that she is expressing 
 nothing but a charitable judgment respecting the 
 former. The hope for which she leaves room re- 
 specting the one, renders emphatic the certainty 
 which she reserves for the other. And if any 
 question remained on this subject, it would be 
 cleared up by the obvious difficulty in which Mr. 
 Goode involves himself, when he attempts to re- 
 concile this rubric with a denial of the regenera- 
 tion of all baptized infants. For he is driven to 
 the avowal of principles, on which the Church's 
 laws make it impossible for him to act. Here is 
 certainly to all appearance a general statement, 
 from which no baptized infants are excluded. 
 And the rule respecting the admission of the bap- 
 tized, and of the baptized only, to the rights of 
 burial, gives it a practical interpretation which 
 cannot be mistaken. And yet it is indispensable 
 to Mr. Goode's position to find some condition by 
 which it may be limited, otherwise the Church 
 must express more than a charitable hope ; she 
 must be speaking of deed, not an hypothesis. The 
 qualification which he adduces is worth attention ; 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 95 
 
 but still more the grounds which lead to its at- 
 tention. "Our Church administering Baptism to 
 infants as the children of true believers, 14 this 
 rubric must be understood accordingly ; otherwise 
 our system of theology is thrown into utter confu- 
 sion." Again he says, " no man has any right to 
 stretch the rubric as to the undoubted salvation 
 of all baptized infants dying in their infancy, so 
 as to include any others than the infants of pro- 
 fessing Christians And further, it is clearly 
 
 open to us to maintain, that such a profession 
 must be a reality, to obtain any blessing from 
 God." 
 
 Baptism, that is, is not the right of all infants, 
 but only of those whose parents are Christians. 
 And since Christianity is a life and not a profes- 
 sion, therefore none can really challenge its bene- 
 fits whose parents are not truly devout Christians. 
 When the Church, therefore, asserts that " children 
 who are baptized, dying before they commit actual 
 sin are undoubtedly saved," she makes a general 
 assertion, because it is uncertain who are its legiti- 
 mate objects ; but none except the children of re- 
 ligious, parents possess that qualification, without 
 which her words are inapplicable. 
 
 Such is Mr. Goode's mode of avoiding the in- 
 ference, that the Church intends to make a gene- 
 
 u The twenty-ninth Canon, which forbids Fathers to be 
 Sponsors for their children, is well known to have been designed 
 to counteract the notion expressed by Mr. Goode, that " the 
 faith of the parent" is " imputable to the infant"; and to show 
 that " it is not the virtue of our Fathers," as Hooker says, 
 " that can give us the true holiness which we have by virtue 
 of our new birth." — Vide an Article in the British Magazine, 
 for Feb. 1840, p. 1G4. 
 
96 
 
 ral statement respecting all baptized infants. He 
 can find no means of escaping the difficulty, but 
 to introduce a qualification for Baptism, which 
 may limit the right of partaking it — that qualifi- 
 cation being the consistent Christianity of the 
 parents. Now it is needless to refer to the opi- 
 nions of our best divines, 15 who are notoriously 
 
 15 Hooker states the arguments against Mr. Goode's opinion. 
 Eccl. Pol. v. 64-5. " To restrain favours, is an odious thing ; 
 to enlarge them, acceptable both to God and Man." " The an- 
 cients," says Wall, "did not in the baptizing of children, go by 
 that rule, which some presbyterians would establish, viz., that 
 none are to be baptized but the children of parents actually godly 
 and religious." " Bishop Stillingfleet has fully shown the ab- 
 surdity and inconsistency of such presbyterians; and how they 
 can never, in many cases that may be put, come to a resolution 
 or agreement what children may be baptized, and what not; and 
 has cleared the grounds of Baptism from such scruples." — His- 
 tory of Infant Baptism, part ii. c. 6. As the limitation of Bap- 
 tism to the children of Christians is so essential a link in Mr. 
 Goode's system, it may be well to observe the testimony which 
 was borne against it, even when Calvinism was in the ascend- 
 ant, by our own leading divines of the Calvinistic party. At the 
 Synod of Dort, a question arose " concerning the baptizing of the 
 children of ethnic parents. The English first exhibited their 
 minds in writing to this effect : That infants, if they were justly 
 taken, as if they were given, or bought, or the like (for it might 
 not be lawful fraudulently or violently to take them from their 
 parents,) ought to be baptized, &c." " On the contrary, the 
 Helvetians and South Hollanders, concluded that the infants of 
 ethnic parents ought not to be baptized till they came to be of 
 years to declare their faith. Their chief reason was, because 
 Baptism was a sign of the covenant : but the infants of ethnic 
 parents are not born within the covenant, and therefore they can- 
 not be partakers of this sign." — Hale's Letters from the Synod of 
 Dort, p. 31. The English Divines were Carlton, Hall, Ward, 
 and Davenant; so that Mr. Goode must have misunderstood the 
 sentiments of the last, when he says that " his writings clearly 
 show that he held the infants of believers only to be proper 
 subjects for Baptism." Of the opinion entertained by the 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 97 
 
 opposed to this hypothesis. No doubt those who 
 wrote against the Anabaptists, employed what 
 against them was a telling argument, that if the 
 children of Christians were worthy of heaven, they 
 must be- worthy of Baptism. Mr. Goode has re- 
 ferred to various instances of this argumentum ad 
 hominem; forgetting that our Church employs In- 
 fant Baptism, professedly because it is "most 
 agreeable with the institution of Christ. " Her 
 intention, therefore, is not to be gathered from 
 what may have been adduced as conclusive 
 against a particular error, but from the laws which 
 regulate her general conduct. And in this case 
 we may appeal to Mr. Goode's own practice. 
 His opinion respecting this subject accords ex- 
 actly with that of Baxter: but whereas he main- 
 tains that such a view is allowed by the Church, 
 Baxter 16 refused to subscribe, on the professed 
 
 Dutch Calvinists (as well as by Mr. Goode,) John Hales 
 observes (Letters, p. 43 :) " a strange decision, and such as, if 
 my memory or reading fail me not, no Church, either ancient or 
 modern, ever gave. When it was objected, What if they were 
 in danger of death 1 Their answer was, that the want of bap- 
 tism would not prejudice them with God, except we would de- 
 termine as the Papists do, that Baptism is necessary to salvation. 
 Which is as much to undervalue the necessity of Baptism, as 
 the Church of Rome does overvalue it." This is a wholly dif- 
 ferent case, of course, from the Baptism of children against the 
 will of their parents, which was always discountenanced, if not 
 positively forbidden. The motive in this case, was a fear of the 
 profanation of the gift. — Vide Maskell on Holy Baptism, cap. 
 xii. p. 343. 
 
 16 "For the new clause of the salvation of baptized infants, as 
 certain by the Word of God, the scruple were the less, if it were 
 confined to the Infants of true believers. But our Church ad- 
 mitteth of all Infants, even of Infidels and Heathens, without 
 distinction, if they have but Godfathers and Godmothers; and 
 the Canon enforccth ministers to baptize them all without ex- 
 
 9 
 
98 
 
 ground that the Church did not allow it. Now 
 which of the two is right as to the question of 
 fact? Is this qualification compatible with the 
 Church's laws? Is Mr. Goode able to act upon 
 it in his own Parish ? He has been admitted to 
 his benefice after promising canonical obedience. 
 Suppose an infant brought to his Church, whose 
 parents are either professed infidels or live in 
 open sin — will he refuse to baptize it ? If not, 
 what becomes of the statement that the consistent 
 Christianity of the Parents is a necessary qualifi- 
 cation for the blessing of Baptism ? If he does, 
 where is the obedience which he has promised to 
 render to the sixty-eighth Canon 17 of the Church 
 of England — a Canon which the ecclesiastical 
 courts would not fail to enforce against him, as 
 they have done lately against others ? 
 
 But, it may be said, this would be the harsh 
 appeal to a law, which when lately enforced in a 
 much harder case (that of denying to recognize 
 schismatical lay-baptism,) excited considerable 
 murmurs. Is an appeal made, then, from the law, 
 
 ception. And when in our public debate with the Bishops, I 
 instanced in one of my Parishioners that was a professed Tnfidel, 
 and yet said he would come and make the common profession 
 for his child for custom sake ; even Dr. Sanderson, the Bishop 
 of Lincoln, answered me (and none of the Bishops contradicted 
 him, but some seconded him,) that if there were Godfathers, it 
 had a sufficient title, which Bishop Morelcy and others con- 
 firmed." — Baxter's Life, part ii. p. 428. 
 
 17 " No minister shall refuse or delay to christen any child 
 according to the form of the Book of Common Prayer, that is 
 brought to the Church to him upon Sundays or Holidays to be 
 
 christened And if he shall refuse to christen .... he 
 
 shall be suspended by the Bishop of the Dioccss from his minis- 
 try by the space of three months." — Canon, l::viii. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 99 
 
 as enforced by Jurists, to the intention of those 
 by whom our formularies were constructed? In 
 the case before us, however, Ave have full informa- 
 tion with what meaning this Rubric was con- 
 structed ; and it can be shown to have been framed 
 with the view of excluding the very interpretation 
 which is put upon it. The Rubric before us is 
 one of those which owes its form to the Commis- 
 sioners who conducted the Savoy Conference. 
 Mr. Goode is very desirous to deny all authority 
 to these Commissioners, and observes that the 
 formal recognition of the Prayer-Book depended 
 upon Convocation and Parliament. But no reason 
 exists for supposing that the Commissioners did 
 not represent, as was designed and supposed, the 
 predominant opinion of the Church ; and the 
 record of their intentions is not invalidated, be- 
 cause Baxter says, that the published Report did 
 not do justice to the arguments of their antago- 
 nists. In the present case at all events the words 
 introduced into the Rubric are manifestly theirs. 
 For they occur in the concessions recommended 
 by the Commissioners. 13 If the meaning, there- 
 fore of this Rubric is to be gathered from the 
 intention with which it was devised, we must 
 plainly refer to their arguments; and such was 
 obviously the feeling of Baxter, a most competent 
 witness respecting the history of this statement. 
 When it was maintained that men might subscribe 
 to the Service-Book, without believing that all 
 baptized infants were brought into a state of sal- 
 vation, he replied ; "Your consciences must tell 
 
 18 CardwelL Hist, of Conf. p. 3G3. 
 
100 
 
 you, that if you limit it to some only, you cross 
 the sense of the compilers of the Liturgy. I am 
 sure Dr. Gunning, who brought it in, hath pub- 
 licly expressed his sense for the salvation of all 
 such Infants." 19 
 
 What then, according to their own explanation, 
 w T as the intention of those who are stated to have 
 inserted the words, " dying before they commit 
 actual sin ?" The words had previously stood, " it 
 is certain by God's Word, that children being bap- 
 tized have all things necessary for their salvation, 
 and be undoubtedly saved." To this the Presby- 
 terians objected, that " although we charitably 
 suppose the meaning of these words was only to 
 exclude the necessity of any other sacraments to 
 baptized infants ; yet these words are dangerous as 
 to the misleading of the vulgar, and therefore we 
 desire that they may be expunged." 20 To which 
 the Bishops replied as follows : " It is evident that 
 the meaning of these words is, that children bap- 
 tized and dying before they commit actual sin are 
 undoubtedly saved, though they be not confirmed : 
 wherein we see not what danger there can be of 
 misleading the vulgar by teaching them truth. 
 But there may be danger in this desire of having 
 these words expunged, as if they were false ; for 
 St. Austin says he is an infidel that denies them 
 to be true."- 1 And that they could not intend to 
 exclude any baptized infants from the benefit of 
 their statement is still further shown by the remark 
 which immediately follows on one of the Prayers at 
 
 19 Baxter's Life by Sylvester, P. ii. p. 428. 
 
 20 Card well, p. 32*7. 
 
 21 Ep. 23. ad Bonifac— Cardwell, p. 358. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 101 
 
 Confirmation : " It supposeth, and that truly, that 
 all infants were at their baptism regenerate by water 
 and the Holy Ghost, and had given unto them the 
 forgiveness of all their sins." 
 
 13 ut perhaps Mr. Goode may observe that 
 though this Rubric owes its form to the Com- 
 missioners at the Savoy Conference, yet that it 
 was only a modification of an eailier statement, 
 which occurred in King Edward's first Prayer- 
 Book. Now, have we any clue to the intention, 
 with which it was originally inserted ? King Ed- 
 ward's Prayer-Book is not so detailed in its state- 
 ments on this subject as to supply a complete 
 answer. We must go a little higher, therefore, 
 and ask what the usage was, which it tacitly 
 adopted. This we may learn even from the form 
 compiled by Bucer and Melancthon for Herman of 
 Cologne. For this Service-Book contains an ex- 
 press provision respecting the baptism of children 
 whose " parents" are " defiled with manifest crimes 
 and abominations." " If the parents be found in 
 such crimes, they shall desire their kinsfolk or other 
 friends, which be as yet the true and lively members 
 of the Church, that in their stead they will ask 
 baptism for their infants." 22 Now, although the 
 first English Prayer-Book does not so expressly con- 
 tradict Mr. Goode's hypothesis, yet the want of any 
 provision which sanctions it, is in reality equivalent 
 to its denial. That children were rendered incapa- 
 ble of the benefits of Baptism through the misconduct 
 of their parents, seems never to have entered into 
 men's minds. And, therefore, when the Presby- 
 terians requested, at the Savoy Conference, that the 
 
 2- Fallow's <• Baptismal Offices Illustrated," p. 30. 
 
 9* 
 
102 
 
 Church's words might receive such alterations as 
 might render them susceptible of the interpretation 
 which Mr. Goode at present assigns to them, the 
 Bishops rejected the proposition altogether, as 
 being not only inconsistent with their own con- 
 victions but also with the immemorial usage of the 
 English Church. " There beinor divers learned, 
 pious, and peaceable ministers," said the Presby- 
 terian remonstrance, " who not only judge it un- 
 lawful to baptize children whose parents, both of 
 them, are atheists, infidels, heretics, or unbaptized, 
 but also such whose parents are excommunicated 
 persons, fornicators, or otherwise notorious and 
 scandalous sinners ; we desire they may not be 
 enforced to baptize the children of such, until they 
 have made due profession of their repentance." 23 
 In this wish Mr. Goode must plainly coincide ; 
 since he asserts that none are entitled to Baptism 
 but the children of Christians, none partakers of 
 its benefits but those whose parents are consistent 
 Christians. But what was the reply of those, by 
 whom the words of the Church's Rubric were 
 suggested ? u We think this desire to be very hard 
 and uncharitable, punishing the poor infants for the 
 parents' sakes, and giving also too great and arbi- 
 trary a power to judge which of his parishioners he 
 pleaseth, atheists, infidels, heretics, &c. — and then 
 in that name to reject their children from being 
 baptized. Our Church concludes more charitably, 
 that Christ will favourably accept every infant to 
 Baptism, that is presented by the Church according 
 to our present order. And this she concludes out 
 of the Holy Scriptures (as you may see in the office 
 
 23 Cardwell, p. 323 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 103 
 
 of Baptism, 1 according to the practice and docrine 
 of the Catholic Church." 3 * 
 
 If the words of the Rubric, then, were not suf- 
 ficient in themselves, the argument by which Mr. 
 Goode would avoid its application would be de- 
 cisive against him. He has no means of avoiding 
 the conclusion that the Church considers all bap- 
 tized children regenerate, except by seeking for a 
 discriminating qualification in the character of 
 the parents. And this involves the necessity of 
 his not only contradicting the Church's present 
 laws, but of his opposing the avowed intention of 
 those who enacted them. 
 
 It has been shown, then, not only that there is 
 no authority for the introduction of any conditions, 
 limiting the general statements used in the Bap- 
 tism of Infants, but also that the conditions which 
 have been suggested are in themselves utterly 
 untenable. To introduce conditions, to which 
 there is no allusion in the Service, would in itself 
 be to pervert the meaning of words ; and the 
 sense which they introduce is incompatible with 
 the Church's statement that adult Catechumens are 
 not regenerate, and with her different mode of 
 dealing with baptized and unbaptized infants. In- 
 somuch, that the objections to this doctrine are 
 not founded upon the words of the Service, which 
 are allowed even by opponents to "favour" it, 
 but upon external difficulties. There is one pas- 
 sage, however in the Catechism, to which the 
 opponents of baptismal regeneration have often 
 
 2t "Cpr. Ep. 59. Aug. Ep. xxviii. et de verb. Apost. Serm. 
 xiv. Cardvvell," p. 355. 
 
104 
 
 referred, as contenancing their hypothesis. "This 
 passage," says Mr. Goode, " directly opposes the 
 notion, that the full baptismal blessing is necessa- 
 rily conferred upon all infants. For not only is it 
 said that ' repentance and faith' are necessary in 
 an adult coming to Baptism, in order that he may 
 profit by it, but in answer to the question, ' why, 
 then are infants baptized, when, by reason of their 
 tender age, they cannot perform them,' the reply 
 is, ' because they promise them both by their sure- 
 ties, which promise when they come to age, them- 
 selves are bound to perform.' Here, then, at once 
 is a limitation to the 'wholesome effect' of Baptism 
 in infants." This passage, then, is supposed to 
 recognize, as an necessary condition for efficacious 
 Baptism, " the prevision by God of future faith 
 and repentance." And Mr. Scott considers it so 
 important, that he speaks of it "as the true key to 
 the meaning of the Church in the language which 
 she uses concerning infants. 25 Now even if this 
 passage had been intended to produce such an 
 effect, it could not neutralize those earlier state- 
 ments of the Church, to which it was added after 
 the Hampton Conference. For the interpretation 
 which would represent it as a key to the Church's 
 meaning, would make our Church's words wholly 
 Pelagian in their tendency, since it would rest 
 God's first act of favour upon something which 
 He sees in men, and not on His own free mercy. 
 It would represent Him as bestowing His gifts 
 where He sees men to be such, that they will 
 respond to His favours. Whereas, as the Council 
 
 25 Scott's Inquiry, p. M6. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 105 
 
 of Orange 50 expresses it, God's favour towards us is 
 founded on what we become after we have received 
 His gifts, not on what we are before we have re- 
 ceived them. His previous love must not be re- 
 ferred at all to our deserts, but wholly to His free 
 favour. Now, to suppose that a gift is offered to 
 all infants, but that it is only bestowed on those 
 who are seen to be about to use it, is to rest the 
 discriminating condition upon the recipient's ex- 
 cellence. And this is a notion which is not only 
 opposed to the whole teaching of the Church, but 
 has been condemned in the strongest terms by 
 Bishop Overall, to whom the conclusion of the 
 Catechism is attributed. "The two views, either 
 of an absolute decree on the part of God, or of a 
 prevision of man's co-operation . . . are wholly to 
 be rejected." 27 To found any such inference, 
 then, on these words, would be utterly inadmis- 
 sible ; and yet, since they are the only words in 
 the Prayer-Book which have been adduced with 
 any show of plausibility, it is needful to examine 
 them. 
 
 The practice of requiring sponsors at Baptism is 
 of ancient date. What purpose was it intended to 
 answer ? The relations in which men may stand 
 towards one another are plainly of two kinds, some 
 depending on the will of the parties, others on 
 their duties. Friendship is a relation of the first 
 kind ; allegiance, of the second. Men are not 
 
 2(3 " Talcs nos amat Deus quales futuri sumus ipsius dono, non 
 quales sumus nostro merito." — Harduin, ii. 1099. 
 
 27 " Pra;stantium Epistolae Theological." Amsterdam, 1704, 
 No. 210, p. 353. This subject is considered at large in the 5th 
 chapter. 
 
106 
 
 friends longer than they desire to be so : alle- 
 giance is a coercive yoke, of which the laws will 
 not allow them to divest themselves. Now, when 
 a man is proxy for his neighbour, it is plain that 
 he cannot undertake those relations which result 
 from will, unless he acts by his neighbour's con- 
 sent; but in respect of those relations which are 
 imposed upon his neighbour by law, the same 
 law may authorize him to act on his neighbour's 
 behalf. This is seen in the guardianship of 
 children. No guardian can undertake to prog- 
 nosticate what will hereafter be the inclination of 
 his infant ward ; but so far as the law gives him 
 power over his ward's property, he can act with 
 confidence on his behalf. Now, the same prin- 
 ciple which is applicable to things earthly, may 
 be employed in estimating our relations to God. 
 For we came into the world owing an allegiance 
 to our Heavenly Sovereign, which the eternal 
 laws of duty forbid us to neglect. The discharge 
 of this allegiance in riper years implies the active 
 exercise of faith and penitence. But during the 
 season of infancy, while the voluntary powers are 
 in abeyance, this allegiance can be nothing more 
 than a duty, which has been contracted by the 
 accident of our birth. For it is fast bound to 
 that general nature, of which every child of Adam 
 is an individual type. 
 
 When a man is proxy, therefore, for an infant 
 towards God, it is not " as if the soul of the child 
 were considered as transferred to his sponsors"- 3 
 (as Mr. Scott at one time viewed the matter.) 
 
 28 Scott's Inquiry, p. HO. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 107 
 
 Such a transfer of souls is impossible in the 
 nature of the case: "for no man may deliver his 
 brother, nor make agreement unto God for him." 
 The only relations which the proxy can under- 
 take are those which some law assigns him : not 
 the voluntary ones, inseparable from the account- 
 ableness of the individual, but those responsibili- 
 ties which he has incurred as an heir of nature. 
 Now this exercise of the proxy's duty the Cate- 
 chism explains. Laying down faith and repent- 
 ance as the general requirements on the part of 
 man, it proceeds to show how far children can 
 discharge them. Its office, as a manual of prac- 
 tical instruction for the young, is not, as Mr. 
 Goode seems to imagine, to defend infant baptism, 
 but to show its relation to the general scheme of 
 Scripture doctrine. And therefore it states in 
 w T hat manner these conditions of faith and re- 
 pentance can be complied with by infants. As 
 respects their voluntary fulfilment, they cannot as 
 yet be performed in any wise, but they do not 
 the less exist as an obligation, inseparable from 
 man's nature. And therefore the same law, 
 w r hich imposes them upon children, gives their 
 guardians authority to make public acknowledg- 
 ment of them. So that in the only sense in 
 which infants can at all act by proxy — the con- 
 tracting, that is, of obligations, the performance 
 whereof some external law will hereafter enforce 
 upon them — they can and do perform the require- 
 ments which are necessary for Baptism. And 
 this it is which the words of the Catechism de- 
 clared, as they were originally penned by Bishop 
 Overall. " Why, then, are infants baptized, 
 
108 
 
 when, by reason of their tender age, they cannot 
 perform them ? Yes, they do perform them by 
 their sureties, who promise and vow them both 
 in their names ; which, when they come to age, 
 themselves are bound to perform." Had the 
 words remained, therefore, as at first written, they 
 would have afforded no opening for the idea that 
 baptismal grace was contingent on men's future 
 conduct. For the wor'ds spoke of something 
 which was then and there performed by the 
 infant, through his sponsors' intervention: and 
 that which a proxy can effect for an infant is not 
 the prognostication of his uncertain will, but the 
 confession of his unquestionable duty. 
 
 But, it may be said, Bishop Overall's original 
 intention was abandoned at the Savoy Confer- 
 ence. Happily, however, we have direct testi- 
 mony why his words were altered, and what was 
 the intention of those who altered them. And 
 since the present words of our Catechism were 
 actually suggested by the Bishops who conducted 
 the Conference, their interpretation of their own 
 meaning is decisive. The words of Bishop Overall 
 were suggested by the Presbyterians to be open to 
 such misconception, as Mr. Goode has been shown 
 to entertain respecting those of Luther. It might 
 be supposed, they said, that an act of repentance 
 and faith really took place in the minds of in- 
 fants ; and not merely that they were admitted in 
 consequence of Christ's appointment, and thereby 
 incurred an obligation to the exercise of that faith 
 and repentance, without which the full advantages 
 of this sacred rite could not be enjoyed. That 
 this was the objection made by the Presbyterian 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 109 
 
 party, and that the Bishops did not design by 
 their concession to admit a mere hypothetical view 
 of regeneration, is apparent from their own words. 
 The former party said, by way of objection to the 
 Catechism as it previously existed, " We desire 
 that the entering infants into God's covenant may 
 be more warily expressed ; and that the words 
 may not seem to found their baptism upon a really 
 actual faith and repentance of their own ; and we 
 desire that a promise may not be taken for a per- 
 formance of such faith and repentance ; and espe- 
 cially that it be not asserted, that they perform 
 these by the promise of their sureties, it being to 
 the seed of believers that the covenant of God is 
 made ; and not, that we can find, to all that have 
 such believing sureties, who are neither parents 
 nor pro-parents of the child." 29 To this the 
 Bishops replied : " The effect of children's bap- 
 tism depends neither upon their own present actual 
 faith and repentance (which the Catechism says 
 expressly they cannot perform,) nor upon the faith 
 and repentance of their natural parents or pro- 
 parents, or of their godfathers or godmothers; but 
 upon the ordinance and institution of Christ. But 
 it is requisite that when they come to age they 
 should perform these conditions of faith and re- 
 pentance, for which, also, their godfathers and 
 godmothers charitably undertook on their be- 
 half."* 
 
 It is plain, therefore, that those who re-moulded 
 the language of the Catechism at the Savoy Con- 
 ference, had no intention of relinquishing theprin- 
 
 29 Cardwell's " History of Co«ferejices," p. 327. 
 
 30 CardwcII, p. 357. 
 
 10 
 
110 THE CHURCH'S ESTIMATE 
 
 ciple which Bishop Overall had originally express- 
 ed. For here were two theories — first, that the 
 spiritual effect of Baptism in the case of infants 
 depended entirely on Christ's institution, and not 
 on any qualifications of which they were pos- 
 sessed ; secondly, that certain qualifications were 
 needed on their part, either the qualification of a 
 present, active faith and repentance, which is the 
 theory which has been erroneously attributed to 
 Luther, or else the qualification of excellence on 
 the part of their parents and sponsors. Now the 
 Bishops plainly affirm the first of these two 
 theories, and deny the second. "The effect of 
 children's Baptism," they say, " depends neither 
 upon their own present actual faith, nor upon the 
 faith of their parents or godfathers." The second 
 of these qualifications indeed, the faith of their 
 God-parents, was sufficiently excluded by Bishop 
 Overall's words; but the other qualification, the 
 actual faith of the children, might seem to be re- 
 cognized : the intention, therefore, of the Bishops, 
 was to turn the force of the answer against the 
 last qualification, not to let in the former. They 
 had no intention of abandoning the truth, that the 
 Baptism of infants rested entirely upon the insti- 
 tution of Christ, but they were willing to guard 
 more effectually against giving countenance to 
 the Anabaptist notion, that an actual present faith 
 was always required. And that such was their 
 feeling, is manifest from the words which they 
 had used just before : " Seeing that God's sacra- 
 ments have their effects, where the receiver doth 
 not " ponere obicem," put any bar against them 
 (which children cannot do ;) we may say in faith 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. Ill 
 
 of every child that is baptized, that it is regene- 
 rated by God's Holy Spirit: and the denial of it 
 tends to Anabaptism, and the contempt of this 
 Holy Sacrament, as nothing worthy, nor material 
 whether it be administered to children or no." 31 
 
 And here perhaps it may be objected that the 
 intention of the Church's rulers in the year 1661, 
 cannot be doubted, but that they may have been 
 overruled by God's Providence or by fear of 
 others, and may have adopted language, which 
 themselves did not believe. The supposition is 
 wholly visionary, since their own party was so 
 plainly in the ascendant, that such a course was 
 as unnecessary as it would have been dishonest. 
 Such, indeed, is the conclusion, which those who 
 follow Mr. Goode must adopt respecting the 
 original compilers of our Service-Book, and upon 
 it rests the opinion that its general promises are 
 to be limited by some secret condition, which 
 w T as present to their minds. But even if the 
 Caroline Bishops could have designed in this 
 way to admit sentiments, which they did not 
 shrink from publicly denying, yet would this ad- 
 mission be wholly ineffectual, so long as it was 
 undone by those acts of the Church, in which 
 they made no alteration. For let it be admitted 
 that the efficacy of Baptism in the case of infants 
 depends not, as the Bishops asserted, on the in- 
 stitution of Christ, but on some qualification de- 
 rived from the piety of their sponsors, or on their 
 own fulfilment of baptismal vows. In this case 
 the act of the sponsors becomes essential to the 
 
 31 Card well, p. 356. 
 
112 THE CHURCH'S ESTIMATE 
 
 validity of the ordinance. If that which is stated 
 respecting them is the key to all the Church's 
 language, that which they do, becomes the criti- 
 cal circumstance on which rests the weight of 
 the Sacrament. But how does this consist with 
 the fact, that sponsorship, though a fitting and 
 useful adjunct, is not essential to Baptism at all ? 
 Private Baptism is administered without it. The 
 Puritans would fain have put a stop to this. 
 "We desire," they say, "that Baptism may not 
 be administered in a private place." "And so 
 do we," the Bishops replied, " where it may be 
 brought into the public congregation. But since 
 Our Lord hath said, 'unless one be born of 
 water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into 
 the kingdom of heaven,' we think if fit that they 
 should be baptized in private, rather than not at 
 all." 33 Here, then, is an act on the Church's part 
 which decides beyond contradiction the meaning 
 of her expressions. A promise is made, and most 
 properly, at Baptism, to express the obligations 
 which the child contracts at that Holy Ordinance. 
 Unless this promise be remembered and appre- 
 ciated, the full prospective benefits of Baptism 
 cannot be appreciated. But there is also an im- 
 mediate effect attendant on Baptism, irrespective 
 of its future relation to the responsible under- 
 standing of the child : and this elfect depends on 
 Christ's institution, and not on the piety of 
 parents and sponsors. And that it does so, is 
 made abundantly manifest by the Church, be- 
 cause she requires that infants should be baptized 
 
 ^ Cardwcll, p. 35G. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 113 
 
 even when parents are not pious, and where 
 sponsors cannot be obtained. 
 
 But the expression which has been cited is by 
 no means the only one in the Catechism which 
 treats of Baptism. The Catechism contains vari- 
 ous statements which are designed to teach child- 
 ren the nature of those obligations which they 
 have contracted. And considering the singleness 
 of heart, and the ready credence which marks 
 that age, the expressions which are designed for 
 it are likely to be distinguished for their simplicity 
 and plainness. The divines at the Savoy state 
 that the Catechism "being short, is fitted for 
 children and common people ;" and the original 
 design of its concluding portion, as suggested at 
 the Hampton Conference, was to adopt "the few- 
 est and plainest affirmative terms that may be." 
 It might be expected, therefore, that no question 
 could be raised what it was, w 7 hich a child was 
 designed to learn when it was taught to say, that 
 "in Baptism" I was "made a member of Christ, 
 the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom 
 of heaven:" or again, when it was instructed to 
 declare that it had been " called to this state of 
 salvation ;" that " the Holy Ghost sanctifieth me 
 and all the elect people of God ;" and, finally, 
 that " we are hereby made the children of grace." 
 Mr. Goode, accordingly, does not scruple to ex- 
 press his disapprobation of the whole system of 
 instruction, which is conveyed on this subject 
 in the Catechism ; though his vow of canonical 
 obedience obliges him to employ it in the instruc- 
 tion of the young. But how can he bring himself 
 to use it at all? After referring to other Cate- 
 10* 
 
114 Till 
 
 chisms, which he parallels wth our own, he states 
 the principle on which he conceives that formu- 
 laries of this sort were designed to be understood 
 by their authors. "No doubt they hoped that 
 such language might lead the sinner to reflection 
 and repentance, when he felt its unsidtability to 
 his state." 33 I cannot refrain from expressing the 
 unmixed regret with which I have read this part 
 of Mr. Goode's volume. What a portent it is, 
 that one who has been put in trust with the care 
 of souls — who has bound himself by vow to teach 
 that simple form of truth which is said to be 
 " fitted for children and common people" — should 
 suppose the Spouse of Christ to be such a "cap- 
 tious sophister," that she can put deceptive words 
 into the mouths of these tender and confiding 
 learners, and that she expects them to find out 
 that when she says one thing she means another. 
 " What man is there of you, whom if his son ask 
 bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a 
 fish will he give him a serpent ?" And can it be 
 believed that the Church would put ironical 
 words into the mouths of Christ's little ones? 
 Is this her mode of treating those "new-born 
 babes, who desire the sincere milk of the Word ? 
 And what result but unbelief can be expected in 
 riper years, if the simplicity of childhood is thus 
 to be bewildered by a text which holds one doc- 
 trine, and a commentator who holds the contrary 
 — by a catechism which affirms that they are re- 
 generate and a catechiser who affirms that they 
 are not ? 
 
 33 u ]\,[y own view," he spys, « would be adverse to the use of 
 such language." &c. 
 
OF HOLY BAPTISM. 115 
 
 And now one word in conclusion. I have no 
 wish to attribute dishonesty to those, who do not 
 read the formularies of the English Church with 
 the same eyes as myself. The understanding of 
 man is so defective an instrument for ascertaining 
 truth, our wishes so greatly influence our conclu- 
 sions, that such charges are unreasonable as well 
 as unchristian. Yet I would wish those who 
 think that the Church of England does not hold the 
 doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, to consider 
 one circumstance. Of those who are called Christ- 
 ians, the larger part profess, while at the same 
 time not a few deny, this doctrine. But while 
 every variety of opinion prevails respecting the 
 doctrine itself, there is one point on which all 
 parties but ourselves are unanimous. Roman 
 Catholics, Dissenters, Infidels, answer with one 
 voice, that the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration 
 is plainly affirmed in the formularies of the Church 
 of England. On this head alone, are those who 
 reject the doctrine and those who accept it, ac- 
 cordant. The only intelligent beings w r ho pro- 
 fess to think otherwise, are those, who combine 
 the rejection of this doctrine w T ith the acceptance 
 of those formularies, in which all uninterested 
 parties suppose it to be expressed. Surely this 
 universal consent should lead earnest minds to a 
 serious and dispassionate consideration of so 
 singular a phenomenon. For that to force the 
 judgment into an opinion which it resists, has 
 occasionally been found to be the only means of 
 maintaining the singular position which has been 
 described, we know from the candid avowal of 
 one who has abandoned it. "I once laboured 
 
116 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 hard," says Mr. Baptist Noel, "to convince ray- 
 self that our Reformers did not, and could not 
 mean that infants are regenerated by baptism ; 
 but no reasoning avails. This language is too 
 plain." " The Prayer-Book assumes clearly, that 
 both adults and infants come to the font unregene- 
 rate, and leave it regenerated ; that worihy recipi- 
 ents of Baptism are not regenerate before Baptism, 
 but come to be regenerated; that they are unpar- 
 doned up to the moment of Baptism, that they 
 are pardoned the moment after." 34 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION OF 
 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE. 
 
 In the first Chapter of this work Regeneration 
 was stated to be that act, whereby Christ takes 
 up His dwelling in mankind ; the putting on, 
 that is, of the New Man. It was next affirmed, 
 on the authority of God's revealed Word, that in 
 the case of those whose unbelief does not deprive 
 them of such blessedness, this divine work is 
 effected in Holy Baptism. That such is the teach- 
 ing of our Church, it has been shown out of its 
 authorized formularies. I now come to a subject 
 of no little moment, by which the English mind 
 is sure to be greatly affected — the practical im- 
 portance of the doctrine. Is the question of 
 
 34 " Essay on Church and State," p. 419. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 117 
 
 Baptismal Regeneration of any great practical 
 moment ? It has sometimes been maintained, 
 that though this doctrine ought to be admitted, 
 because it is revealed in Scripture and taught by 
 the Church, vet that it exercises no serious influ- 
 
 ence, and that those who reject it are rather in- 
 accurate in their expressions than heretical in 
 their thoughts. It can have no place, it is said, 
 in the practical teaching of earnest men : those 
 who are careless need to be awakened, and those 
 who are devout need to advance ; what use is it, 
 then, to think about the stages which have been 
 already traversed either by the one or the other ? 
 Yet if this were so, why should so many volumes 
 have been expended upon the subject, and how 
 unmeaning have been all the deadly disputes to 
 which it has given occasion? It could hardly 
 have been the great battle-field, in which oppo- 
 site opinions have uniformly come into collision, 
 unless it exercised some real and important influ- 
 ence upon the progress of religious thought. 
 
 To do justice, then, to this subject, it will be 
 well to inquire, first, why Baptismal Regeneration 
 has been so vehemently opposed by its antago- 
 nists ; and why its supporters have looked upon 
 it as the keystone of their position. 
 
 The opposition to Baptismal Regeneration on 
 the part of earnest men, seems to have arisen 
 mainly from a fear lest it should do away with 
 the necessity, or detract from the importance of 
 conversion. I will not enter into controversy, 
 says Mr. Scott, with persons who believe that 
 those who have neglected their baptismal vows, 
 "do still need that great and radical change, on 
 
118 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE. 
 
 which the Scriptures insist." 1 And even Mr 
 Goode allows that " when the distinction is pre 
 served between this infantine regeneration and 
 that regeneration of heart, which is necessary for 
 the salvation of an adult, then (whether or not we 
 agree in the view taken) it seems very unneces- 
 sary to raise a further controversy." Now, had 
 these and other writers always kept this truth be- 
 fore them, a large part of the distrust and hostility 
 which the subject has excited, might probably 
 have been avoided. Their feeling plainly was, 
 that the importance of a change of character had 
 not been duly remembered, that Regeneration 
 had too often been spoken of as a mere technical, 
 official process ; and thus has man's salvation 
 been rested only on his external profession, and 
 not on any real alteration of the heart. Against 
 such an error it was impossible to protest too 
 strongly. But unfortunately, in their earnestness 
 to resist falsehood, men have sometimes sacrificed 
 truth ; they have supposed it impossible to exalt 
 regeneration, unless at the same time they dis- 
 paraged Baptism. Thus does Mr. Scott refer, as 
 though it were an admitted truth, to the opinion 
 that if Our Lord's statement respecting the New 
 Birth, in the third chapter of St. John, " relate to 
 Baptism or what necessarily or inseparably ac- 
 companies Baptism, then it means nothing to us 
 who have received Baptism."* Yet no words can 
 possibly be more opposed to the opinions of those 
 who believe in the efficacy of baptismal grace. 
 This misdirection in the efforts of those who de- 
 
 1 " Reply to Laurence," p 147. 2 Inquiry, p. 33. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 119. 
 
 sired to vindicate the importance of regeneration, 
 has involved a corresponding re-action on the part 
 of some who were jealous for the honour of Holy 
 Baptism. Insomuch that it was supposed at one 
 time, that a man could not have a due apprecia- 
 tion of the one, if he was disposed to do hearty 
 justice to the other. No one can pretend to say 
 how far his own feelings on the subject may result 
 from that early association, which has happily 
 taught him to believe in the reality of spiritual 
 gifts, and yet to reverence God's appointed ordi- 
 nances ; but the present writer cannot refrain from 
 saying that he has met with no statements from 
 any of our approved writers, either of the reality 
 of regeneration, or of the efficacy of Baptism, with 
 which he does not heartily concur. It is stated 
 on the one side that regeneration is a* change of 
 heart, not of circumstances — that its influence ex- 
 tends to the whole life — that it is a divine work 
 wrought in man by the sovereign power of the 
 Holy Ghost — all this, and whatever else of a si- 
 milar kind can be thought of, he not only admits, 
 but most strongly maintains. For what truth can 
 be of graver importance ? But, on the other hand, 
 that Baptism is a real participation of Christ's na- 
 ture, that all baptized infants are translated from 
 death to life, and are made members by grace of 
 the New, as by birth they were portions of the old 
 Adam — this, likewise is revealed in Holy Scrip- 
 ture. Let the two parties, then, keep to the posi- 
 tive enunciation of their own principles, and they 
 cannot go too far in their assertions. It is only 
 when they pass into one another's ground ; when 
 the one party disparages Baptism, and the other 
 
120 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 explains away Regeneration, that the desire oi 
 opposing error leads them away from truth. 
 
 Now this seems to have given rise to the pre- 
 valent opinion, that belief in Baptismal Regene- 
 ration is inconsistent with a due appreciation of the 
 doctrine of conversion. Yet if the nature of the 
 two processes be considered, this fancied opposi- 
 tion will vanish at once. Regeneration is that work, 
 whereby God renews, man's nature. Its imme- 
 diate process is the substitution of that new nature, 
 which has been re-constructed in Christ, for that 
 old nature which was corrupted in Adam. That 
 the process thus mercifully provided for our re- 
 covery reaches to the w T hole man — that no partot 
 him is untouched by that renewing power of 
 grace, which has its source in God's love, and its 
 channel in the Manhood of the Mediator — is not 
 inconsistent with the truth, that in man resides a 
 power of will, which must yield to the suasion of 
 these better principles. The process whereby the 
 will makes this surrender is conversion. Look 
 at the motive principle by which the will is swayed 
 to good, and it is God's grace ; look to the action 
 itself, and it is man's faith and repentance. 
 Whether this process takes place early or late, 
 with the first dawnings of reason or in the last 
 hour of its possession, it is plain that the corrupt 
 will which opposes and prevents it, is incompa- 
 tible with the state of grace. But what reason is 
 there why a jealous regard for this truth should 
 blind men to the reality of those gifts, with which 
 the Mediator has enriched His saving ordinances? 
 
 There is no reason, then, for denying Baptismal 
 Regeneration, on the ground that it is incompatible 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 121 
 
 with the doctrine of conversion. But is its asser- 
 tion of any practical importance ? For if it be a 
 technical dogma, and is needed only to complete a 
 theological system, without exercising influence 
 over men's lives, it were useless to trouble our- 
 selves with its defence ? Nor would there be 
 much interest in the task, were it the main object 
 of this doctrine, as seems to have been thought in 
 the last century, to repress that irregular enthusiasm 
 which might otherwise overflow the established 
 limits of orthodoxy. But it is a very different con- 
 sideration, and of far higher interest, that upon it 
 depends so large a part of the responsibility of man- 
 kind. For what single circumstance is more fraught 
 with practical consequences, than that it has pleased 
 God to bestow grace, for which men are respon- 
 sible ? What has more contributed to the neglect 
 of Gospel blessings, than that parents have forgot- 
 ten to warn their children, that they must answer 
 for the gifts which they have already received ? For 
 in truth, Christian education is based entirely upon 
 a belief in Baptismal grace. It does not appear 
 how Christian education can be generally given on 
 any other hypothesis, without implying the error of 
 Pelagianism. For is it not its essence that educa- 
 tion is to precede improvement ? Does it not begin 
 by assuming principles, which are not yet exhibited ? 
 Does it not accustom the infant tongue to the accents 
 of prayer and praise, before it can be ascertained 
 how far the mind receives them ? And is not this 
 to sssume that all Christian children have received 
 a measure of grace ? Yet we have no ground for 
 supposing such a gift to have been bestowed upon 
 our little ones, unless we have brought them to 
 11 
 
122 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 Christ. 3 Zuinglius, therefore, and those who agreed 
 with him, were driven to deny that the children of 
 Christians were in reality born in original sin ; 4 and 
 Mr. Goode on the other hand disapproves of the 
 mode in which the Catechism addresses children as 
 already possessed of a Divine gift. " My own 
 view," he says, " would, even in theory, apart from 
 the experience of the results, be adverse to the use 
 of such language." But not only is this system of 
 education enjoined by the Church's laws, and re- 
 commended by her practice, but it has the sanction 
 of the best writers even of the school which Mr. 
 Goode professes to respect. Even Bucer founds 
 the duty of parents upon the gift of Baptism, and 
 speaks of the importance of not stifling the seed of 
 God's word, which he describes as already received 
 previously to the very first dawning of reason." 3 
 " For though we cannot understand the action of 
 God on the infant mind, yet it is certain," he 
 says, " that new and sacred impulses are wrought 
 in it." 
 
 3 The early Church gave careful training to Catechumens. 
 But this training was not irrespective of Baptism, but was 
 based upon that gift of grace, which in the case of adults, whose 
 individual responsibility is developed, is its indispensable pre- 
 parative. 
 
 4 Vide Pusey on Baptism, p. 102, 121, (first Ed.) 
 
 5 " Se suorum liberorum, postquam baptismate eos Domino 
 consecraverint, prsdagogos magis quam patres agnoscant. Quos 
 eniin ipsi genuerant came in mortem, norunt Christum regen- 
 uisse baptismate in vitam aeternam." — Script. Ang. p. 7. 
 
 Then follows an allusion to the " Semon verbi Dei," which 
 must be explained by the words to which he subscribed in his 
 concord with Luther, « constat infantilis contingcre per bap- 
 tismum .... donationcm Spiritus Sancti, qui in eis etficax est 
 pro ipsorum modo." — Script Anglic, p. 6G8. 
 
 c Script. Anglic, p. 6G8. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 123 
 
 It is a matter of wonder that the consideration 
 which has been mentioned has so little weight with 
 earnest-minded men. How is it that they do not 
 perceive, that their own principles involve the 
 necessity of some means of union between the 
 infant and God ? A real belief in original sin, im- 
 plies, of necessity, a belief in baptismal purification. 
 The unwillingness to admit it in words, while at 
 the same time their own practice constantly recog- 
 nizes it, illustrates that which Bishop Butler so 
 admirably enforces, the impossibility of reducing the 
 scheme of Necessity to practice. It would seem, 
 indeed, that a great part of men's repugnance to this 
 view of things, is to be traced to an opinion, that 
 if a measure of grace has been already bestowed, 
 the process of subsequent conversion will be crip- 
 pled. The ground of this erroneous impression is, 
 that they do not discriminate between man's com- 
 mon nature, and his individual responsibility. The 
 gift of grace, indeed, produces so wide an effect, as 
 to influence the whole of man's being. Yet the 
 principle of responsibility still remains. As it co- 
 existed with the law of nature, so does it co-exist 
 with the law of grace. Its positions and obliga- 
 tions are altered ; but the Will is still man's Will, 
 and accountable for its acts. 
 
 But there remains another very important con- 
 sideration, on which the practical moment of Bap- 
 tismal Regeneration may be based ; its connexion 
 with a belief in Our Lord's Mediation. The doc- 
 trine of the sacraments is so essentially allied to 
 this central truth of the Gospel, that they may be 
 shown to be as closely associated in theory, as the 
 experience of three centuries has proved them to be 
 
124 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 in fact. And this is the main reason why the 
 Church has always held so firmly to the truth of 
 Baptismal Regeneration : not only is it a question 
 of practical importance to all her children, but it 
 involves her belief in the main point of Theology, 
 the " Articulus stantis aut cadentis ecclesiae 1 ' the 
 Mediation, namely, of the God-man, Jesus Christ 
 Our Lord. To this subject we now direct at- 
 tention. 
 
 The blessings of Regeneration have been shown 
 to depend upon that gift of grace, which is be- 
 stowed by God upon man. Such a process has 
 been shown to involve the consideration of two 
 parties — God who bestows gifts — man who re- 
 ceives them. God's method of bestowing grace 
 in the Gospel covenant has been stated to be the 
 Mediation of the Man Christ Jesus. Those gifts 
 which were needed for the recovery of the fallen 
 children of Adam, were embodied in the conse- 
 crated Manhood of the Word, that from this foun- 
 tain they might flow forth into the whole generation 
 of his brethren. This was the new system by 
 which the original law of nature was superseded. 
 The Son of Mary was the Second Adam, from 
 whom flowed forth a stream of life, to correct that 
 hereditary taint, which had been transmitted to 
 all the naturally-descended children of Eve. Now 
 it has been already shown by the testimony of 
 Holy Scriptures, that the means whereby the 
 Second Adam propagates that spiritual life which 
 we derive from Him, is the system of Sacraments. 
 Nothing shall here be said of the Holy Eucharist, 
 because not falling within the range of the present 
 inquiry. Nor can it be needful to quote the words 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 125 
 
 of the Church's ancient Authors, because their 
 opinions have been sufficiently exhibited by Bishop 
 Bethell and Dr. Pusey. I will cite an author of 
 a later age, and a different school of Theology, 
 whose words may show how novel is that system, 
 which would lead men to expect the gifts of 
 grace, independently of the agency of the Second 
 Adam. " Baptism," says Luther, " cannot fail 
 to effect that for which it was appointed, namely, 
 regeneration and spiritual renewal, as St. Paul 
 teaches in the third Chapter to Titus. For as 
 we were born into this life from Adam and Eve, 
 so our true man which was before born in sins to 
 death must be regenerated to righteousness and 
 eternal life, by the power of the Holy Ghost. To 
 this regeneration and renewal there lacks the ap- 
 plication of no other external means than Water, 
 and Words ; of the one whereof our eyes take 
 note, our ears of the other. Yet they have such 
 virtue and energy that the man who was con- 
 ceived and born in sin is regenerated in the view 
 of God ; and that he who was before condemned 
 to death, is now made truly God's son. This 
 glory and virtue of Holy Baptism, who can attain, 
 and perceive by sense, thought, and human intel- 
 lect ? You should not regard, therefore, the hand 
 or mouth of the minister who baptizes — who pours 
 over the body a little water, which he has taken 
 in the hollow of his hand, and pronounces some 
 few words (a thing, slight and easy in itself, ad- 
 dressing itself only to the eyes and ears; and our 
 blinded reason sees no more to be accomplished 
 by the minister ;) but in all this you must behold 
 and consider the word and work of God, by 
 11* 
 
126 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 whose authority and command Baptism is minis- 
 tered, who is its founder and author, yea, who is 
 Himself the Baptist. And hence has Baptism 
 such virtue and energy (as the Holy Ghost wit- 
 nesses by St. Paul,) that it is the Laver of re- 
 generation, and of the renewal of the Holy Ghost ; 
 by which laver the impure and sentenced nature, 
 which we draw from Adam, is altered and amend- 
 ed. For we are all born in sin, and reek with 
 pollution and defilement; so foul a leprosy of sin 
 pervades us, that our heart and reason oppose 
 God's law and will, and from this plague we 
 have no power to purify ourselves. But the La- 
 ver of regeneration purifies and takes away our 
 hereditary disease, and renders us innocent, so 
 that being exempted from sin and death, we may 
 rise in the last day, more clean and glorious than 
 the sun — pure in mind and body." Therefore 
 Luther goes on to add, u the minister's agency 
 is required ; his hand and mouth must be used in 
 pouring out water, and pronouncing words : but I 
 ought to look not at the visible, but the invisible 
 Baptist, the author and founder of Baptism." 7 
 
 This is but a single passage out of many, 
 which might be quoted from Luther's Homilies 
 on Baptism. Neither is it adduced for the pur- 
 pose of showing his uniform judgment on this 
 subject, which has been amply effected by Dr. 
 Laurence ; nor because his judgment is an author- 
 ity with members of the Church of England ; but 
 because it sets forth so ably the truth which I de- 
 
 ' " Homilise de Baptismo." Lutheri Opcr. "Wittenberg, 15.-^. 
 vol. vii. p. 377. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 127 
 
 sire to establish, that Baptism is the appointed 
 means wherein the Second Adam communicates 
 His renewed nature to His brethren. That which 
 Luther's words especially exhibit, is that when 
 we look to the Divine Giver of grace, when we 
 abstract our thoughts from any thing, which men 
 contribute towards the work of renewal, we find 
 this rite of Baptism appointed as the specific 
 mean, through which God is pleased to bestow 
 His blessings. Hence Luther begins his Homilies 
 on the subject by saying, " If Baptism is to be 
 anything, and deserves the name of a Sacrament, 
 there must of necessity be some external sign and 
 tangible creature, through which God deals visi- 
 bly with us, that we may be sure of His action. 
 For it is not Ills will to deal with us without exter- 
 nal media, through unembodied secret inspirations 
 and influences or by any private and secret revela- 
 tions"* The denial of such individual influence 
 on the part of God cannot be meant, of course, to 
 put a bar upon the general law of spiritual influ- 
 ences ; the thing intended is, to set forth Baptism as 
 being in its own line the revealed medium through 
 which such influences descend from God to man, 
 inasmuch as it is the declared instrument through 
 which the gifts of Mediation are extended to the 
 
 8 Horn. vol. vii. p. 347. The original German of another pas- 
 sage, elsewhere quoted in Latin is very forcible. " Wiltu mich 
 leren was Geist ist, und wo ich in finde, So mustu mich nicht ins 
 SchlaurafTonland weisen. . . . Sondern hie mustu ihn suchen, 
 dahin Er in selbs gesteck that, durch das Wort, das er die Tauffe 
 einsetzt in seinem eigen Namen." — Predigten, D. M. L. von 
 unser heiligen TauflTe, Anno xxxv. Luthers Works, Jena, 1558. 
 vol. iv. p. 302. 
 
128 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 children of the Second Adam. Now when we 
 proceed to consider the effect of these spiritual 
 gifts as they manifest themselves in the human 
 receiver, it is clear that a second element must 
 be taken into account ; we have not only the 
 agency of God who bestows gifts, but of man who 
 receives them. All the good actions of men are 
 referrible to the combined agency of these two 
 principles. They have in them something divine, 
 or they could not be good : they have something 
 human in them, or they would not be the acts of 
 responsible beings. Now, where an action is in 
 this way the result of two combining influences, 
 there is peculiar danger lest one element or the 
 other should be overlooked. And since our 
 own contingent towards our acts is impressed 
 upon us by our own consciousness, nothing is 
 more probable than that we should overlook that 
 Divine co-operation, of which we are assured only 
 by faith and revelation. 
 
 And here it is that the regeneration of Infants 
 in Baptism supplies a test of such peculiar value. 
 ]f there be any instance in which it is possible to 
 eliminate one of two agencies, which combine to 
 produce a common result, such an instance enables 
 us to appreciate the importance which is to be 
 assigned to the other. This opportunity is afforded 
 us in the Baptism of infants. 8 Seeing that in their 
 case the will of the human receiver is wholly in- 
 operative, the benefit of the ordinance must fall 
 entirely on the side of the Divine Giver. So that 
 
 9 The connexion of Baptism with the Sacramental System at 
 large, is stated strikingly by Cranmer in his answer to Gardner 
 Jenkyns's Ed. iii. 65. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 129 
 
 we have an opportunity of knowing whether men 
 believe that in the Gospel Covenant any thing is 
 really done by God, irrespective of the instrumen- 
 tality of mortals. And thus does this doctrine 
 supply us with a most invaluable criterion, which 
 is applicable to the whole Sacramental system. 
 For the real weight of all those controversies which 
 agitate the present day, rests upon a single point ; 
 whether God has been pleased really to renew 
 humanity through the action of Christ, or whether 
 He looks only, as a favouring co-operator, upon 
 those whose w T ish is to renew themselves. The 
 first is the Church system ; it regards Christ's In- 
 carnation as the Regeneration of Nature, and the 
 Sacramental system as our mean of participating 
 in this mighty alteration : the second does not al- 
 together exclude God's action, but it looks upon 
 it as co-operating only with the action of the hu- 
 man will. I do not at present enter upon the 
 theory of Calvinism, I am dealing only with the 
 practical effect of any system of teaching which 
 denies the reality of Baptismal Grace. The result 
 of such a system is to throw the whole w T eight on 
 the side of the human agent, and thereby to de- 
 tract from the reality of those blessings which are 
 bestowed through the Mediation of Christ. So 
 that besides the practical effort of Baptismal Re- 
 generation, as suggesting the deepest reasons for 
 self-examination and watchfulness, it supplies us 
 with a means of estimating how far men really 
 appreciate those gifts of grace, which are bestowed 
 through the channel of Our Lord's Mediation. 
 When men will not admit that anything is really 
 done in an instance, in which all that we are sure 
 
130 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 of is, that man can contribute nothing, when they 
 say that the Church's assurances, that something is 
 really effected, can refer only to those cases in 
 which infants possess peculiar qualifications, or in 
 which their future exertions are foreseen by the 
 Divine Foreknowledge — they must pardon us if 
 we venture to doubt how far their professions of 
 referring to Divine help in other cases mean any 
 thing; if we attribute them rather to a decorous 
 habit of self-renunciation, than to any genuine 
 perception that the true source of action is in the 
 Divine Giver. If they refuse to recognize the 
 action of a divine power in the only instance in 
 which we are able to disengage it altogether from 
 human co-operation, is there not reason to question 
 whether in other cases they have actual belief, as 
 themselves suppose, in the agency of that unseen In- 
 telligence, who is truly to be recognized as the parent 
 of all holy action in the Church of the Redeemed ? 
 There are many who will be startled by the line 
 of argument which has been employed. The as- 
 sertion that to deny Baptismal Regeneration is to 
 derogate from the doctrine of Our Lord's Media- 
 tion, they will be ready to resent as an unjust 
 imputation. Yet they should remember, that 
 where this doctrine had been denied by any com- 
 munity of men (provided there has been opportu- 
 nity for the free development of its tendencies,) 
 the heresy of Socinus has in every instance been 
 the result. And they should not be surprised if 
 a logical coherence be pointed out between opi- 
 nions, which have been shown by experience to 
 be actually related. Yet men will say, with truth, 
 that this is the last thing which they consciously 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 131 
 
 design, they have no intention of denying that all 
 gifts proceed from God, through the Mediation of 
 Christ ; all which they intend to deny is the pre- 
 dominant place which has been assigned to Sacra- 
 ments. For this they say is to attach unreasonable 
 importance to what is external. Christ's propi- 
 tiation for us, they observe, depends upon His 
 death; and He is able to sympathize with us be- 
 cause He participates in our nature. Butwehold 
 intercourse with Him net merely through that Sa- 
 cramental union w T hich is commenced in Baptism, 
 but likewise by all those affections and desires, 
 all those prayers and ejaculations, in which the 
 soul is drawn towards its Saviour. Sacraments 
 they allow to be of especial efficacy, but then it is 
 only because their acted nature gives greater life 
 to the affections of those who celebrate them. 
 And the higher view which has been taken of 
 their effect, as the actual means, whereby the Me- 
 diator bestow T s heavenly blessings, would in their 
 opinion be to substitute the Incarnation for the 
 Atonement, and Christ's Sacramental presence for 
 the sanctifying agency of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 A word in the first place respecting the two last 
 objections. If the propitiation w T hich Our Lord 
 effected on the Cross for the sins of men was a real 
 work, and not a mere technical representation — if it 
 effected any actual change in the position of men — 
 it must have been built on the truth of that oneness 
 between Him and mankind, which was brought 
 about through His Incarnation. " Sacrifice and 
 offering Thou wouldest not, but a body hast Thou 
 prepared me." To set up, therefore, the Atone- 
 ment of Christ against His Incarnation, as though 
 
132 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 the two doctrines could be contrasted with one 
 another, is as if it were supposed that God's creative 
 power was denied, because His Omnipotence was 
 asserted. Again, to set up the sanctifying influ- 
 ence of God the Holy Ghost against the Sacra- 
 mental Presence of the Incarnate Word, is to forget 
 what was that especial function which the Third 
 Person to the Blessed Trinity undertook to dis- 
 charge in the work of man's redemption. For His 
 offices were not irrespective of the Incarnation of 
 the Word; the presence of the Word was the very 
 gift which the Spirit was to bestow upon the faith- 
 ful : " He shall receive of Mine and shall show it 
 unto you." That which consecrated the Manhood 
 of the Son of God to be the food of souls, was that 
 hallowing influence of the Holy Ghost which the 
 God-man at once procured and bestowed by His 
 Ascension. " What and if ye shall see the Son ot 
 man ascend up where He was before. It is the 
 Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing." 
 There can be no contrast, then, between the 
 Sanctifying power of the Holy Ghost, and the God- 
 man's Sacramental Presence ; because the very ob- 
 ject of the one is to bestow upon us the other. As 
 the Two Blessed Persons are one in their nature, 
 so are the two influences identical in their effect. 
 And as to the assertion that prayer and holy affec- 
 tions are a means of union with Christ, this, be it 
 remembered, is to refer to those means whereby w T e 
 hold intercourse with God ; whereas that which we 
 are considering, is the mean whereby God holds 
 inter. ourse with us. There can be no more con- 
 trast, therefore, between these things, than between 
 the loyalty of a subject and the bounty of his Prince. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 133 
 
 We hold intercourse with God through all those 
 means whereby we ascend towards Him. He holds 
 intercourse with us through the Mediation of Christ ; 
 and therein through those peculiar institutions 
 whereby the sanctified Humanity of Him, who is 
 one with the Father, is transmitted to His earthly 
 brethren. So that we may take that one case in 
 which this action is wholly detached from any 
 human co-operation, namely that of Infant Baptism, 
 as a test whether the other actions of the Mediator 
 are really apprehended. 
 
 For even those actings of Christ Our Lord upon 
 the spirits of men, which might seem to be most 
 independent of the Sacramental System, have a real 
 relation to it. The actings of the Eternal Word 
 are as wide as the spirits which He has created. 
 " In Him was life, and the life was the light of 
 men." And this is the secret of that gracious in- 
 fluence, by which those who are strangers to the 
 Church are not wholly unvisited : this seed sprung 
 up in the heart of many a Gentile : it is present 
 even now in those whom invincible ignorance de- 
 tains without the Church's pale, who yearn after 
 her blessings but do not possess them. Such men 
 " show the work of the law written in their hearts." 
 But is not the very purpose of this gracious in- 
 fluence to lead men to that full incorporation with 
 the Word made flesh, whereby they may become 
 fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household 
 of God ? These Divine influences then, whereby 
 the Word draws all hearts towards entire com- 
 munion with Him, are not irrespective of His Sacra- 
 mental Presence, seeing that it is the term towards 
 which they are tending. 
 
 12 
 
134 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 And still more is that hidden communion of soul, 
 whereby He sways the hearts of those who are truly 
 joined to Him, a result of their full oneness with 
 Himself. " The secret of the Lord is with them 
 that fear Him." As that preventing influence 
 whereby He wins men to Him, tends towards Sacra- 
 mental union as its highest term, so the sympathy 
 between Christ and His people is built upon the 
 same union, as its fundamental principle. For both 
 are based upon the truth that through His manhood 
 are derived those regenerating gifts, which sanctify 
 ours. Let it be considered, then, what is the real 
 meaning of setting up these means of union with 
 Christ, as something which may be opposed to that 
 Sacramental union, from which they derive their 
 efficacy. It is nothing else, in truth, but to put 
 those means of union with God which we had by 
 nature, in place of those which are given to us 
 through the Mediation of Christ. For what leads 
 men to contend for and prefer those opportunities 
 of union, which are irrespective of the Sacramental 
 system ? The system of Sacraments, they say, de- 
 pends too much on what is physical and external : 
 these things can have no real tendency to confer 
 grace. " It is not very conceivable/' says one 
 writer, "how water, literally taken, being applied 
 to the body, should be instrumental to the regene- 
 ration of the soul." " The washing of the body," 
 says another, " cannot affect the soul, nor infuse 
 any gracious habits into it, which itself hath not ; 
 neither can it work morally by way of suasion and 
 argument, because infants have not the use of reason 
 to apprehend any such." These are arguments 
 drawn from the unfitness of the material agents, em- 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 135 
 
 ployed in Baptism, to produce an inward result. 
 Such a mode of reasoning implies of course that we 
 have a certain standard in our own^minds, whereby 
 we are able to judge, respecting the consonance or 
 inconsonance of the means employed, to bring about 
 their effect. Now what are the channels to which 
 men look, as fitter than Sacraments for conveying a 
 spiritual effect ? They are professedly those which 
 are less eatemal ; those which arise out of the nature 
 of the mind, which are built upon its power of com- 
 muning at once with unseen intelligences — these 
 means of intercourse with God seem more natural, 
 and men refer to these, when they say that we do 
 not hold intercourse with God merely by Sacra- 
 ments, but by all those holy aspirations, whereby 
 the mind travels forth towards its invisible Creator. 
 That when men become members of Christ they are 
 restored to that right of intercourse with God, which 
 renders their thoughts and affections a means of 
 communion with Him, has already been admitted. 
 But to rest upon this mean of union in opposition to 
 the system of Sacraments, is to abandon the law of 
 grace for the law of nature. For the very loss 
 which men incurred by the Fall, was the forfeiture 
 of that natural intercourse with God, which can 
 only be replaced through the Mediation of Christ. 
 So that to revert to those inward channels, where- 
 by the soul was naturally fitted to approach God, is 
 to fancy that we can turn to God of ourselves, and 
 thus to fall into the error of Pelagianism ; and 
 thereby to renounce that doctrine of Mediation, 
 which is founded on the re-creation of mankind in 
 Christ. 
 
 Now it is no answer to these complaints to say, 
 
136 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 as men will do, that they are not Pelagians, because 
 they trust to God's power, and not to their own 
 efforts; and that they do not reject Christ's Media- 
 tion, because His death, intercession, and sym- 
 pathy, are the basis of their hopes. For Pelagianism 
 does not consist merely of the professed assertion 
 that men can save themselves ; it lies at the bottom 
 of every system, which builds the great work oi 
 man's recovery on agencies which act directly 
 through the natural faculties of each man's mind, 
 instead of resting it on that renewal of humanity at 
 at large, which was effected in the Incarnation oi 
 Christ. For what are our natural faculties but a 
 gift of God ? 10 What, therefore, are those move- 
 ments which they severally originate, but His 
 work ? In this sense, therefore, all who believe in 
 a Creator at all, may suppose that all good aspi- 
 rations are a divine gift. But then this mode of 
 receiving blessings has been obstructed by sin. In 
 place of it came that communication of divine 
 power, which had its centre in the humanity of the 
 Second Adam. To refer, therefore, to these natural 
 channels of communion with God, as something 
 which may be substituted in the place of that 
 sacramental fellowship, whereby he communicates 
 His nature, is the very error of Pelagius, because 
 it is to substitute the efficacy of nature for the effi- 
 cacy of grace. 
 
 Nor is it to any purpose to say that these ob- 
 jections do not apply, because men affirm that all 
 their hopes are founded on the sacrifice of Christ. 
 For men cannot do full justice to the sacrifice, 
 
 10 St. Austin, Ep. cxciv. vol. ii. p. 717. 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 137 
 
 intercession, and sympathy of Christ, unless they 
 recognize that main Jaw of His Mediation, that 
 through His manhood were bestowed those gifts 
 of grace, by which the regeneration of His bre- 
 thren was to be effected. Each part of our Lord's 
 work may no doubt be viewed by itself, and the 
 efficacy of each implies the reality of His charac- 
 ter ; but men cannot discern the full purpose of 
 His mission, unless the whole truth of His Me- 
 diation be accepted. To leave out of account the 
 operation of Our Lord's manhood, as the mean 
 through which spiritual blessings are communi- 
 cated to man, has a direct tendency to lead men 
 into that error of Sabellianism, which would merge 
 the reality of his person in a mere appellation, 
 under which the Eternal Father is pleased to be 
 addressed. This is exactly the effect which the 
 denial of the Sacramental system has been upon a 
 recent writer, who tells us, that Christ is only "a 
 change of name" for God; and that " the re- 
 verential imagination of the Church at Antioch 
 sublimated the Mediator into something spiritually 
 un distinguishable from the morally perfect and 
 omnipresent God, and thus neutralized the doc- 
 trine ; saving spirituality at the expense of logic." 11 
 In this manner is the reality of our Lord's being, 
 denied by a person, who yet professes to reve- 
 rence the name of Christ. For what more clearly 
 marks out the Eternal Word as a true Person in 
 the Ever-Blessed Trinity, than that participation 
 in our nature, which He vouchsafed to make the 
 instrument in His work of Mediation? And al- 
 
 11 « The Soul," &c, by F. W. Newman, p. 67. 
 
138 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 though men may be kept from such avowed Sa- 
 bellianism by their belief in the efficacy of Our 
 Lord's sacrifice, and in the value of His inter- 
 cession, yet past experience shows how liable are 
 even these truths to be lost, when their relation to 
 the other acts of the Mediator are forgotten. And 
 the history of the Nonconformist congregations in 
 our own country (all of whom gradually sub- 
 sided into Socinian disbelief,) shows that it is not 
 the mere technical affirmation of divine truths 
 which will insure the Church's vitality, unless 
 that practical system is duly maintained, whereby 
 the Godman communicates Himself in Sacraments 
 to His people. For what could be better than the 
 theoretical statement of truth which is given by 
 Baxter, who yet formed the first link in a series, 
 which has ended in an entire denial of Our Lord's 
 Mediation ? " The Spirit," he says, " is not given 
 radically or immediately to any Christian, but to 
 Christ our head alone, and from Him to us." 
 u These things," he remarks, are distinctly and 
 clearly understood but by very few ; and we are 
 all very much in the dark about them. But I 
 think (however doctrinally we may speak better) 
 that most Christians are habituated to this peril- 
 ous misapprehension (which is partly against 
 Christianity itself,) that the Spirit floweth imme- 
 diately from the Divine nature of the Father and 
 of the Son (as to the authoritative or potestative 
 conveyance) unto our souls. And we forget that 
 it is first given to Christ in His glorified huma- 
 nity as our Head, and radicated in Him, and that 
 it is the office of this glorified Head to send or 
 communicate to all His members from Himself 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 139 
 
 that Spirit, which must operate in them as they 
 have need." Again, "the Spirit is not given 
 radically or immediately from God to any believer, 
 but to Christ, and so derivatively from Him to us. 
 Not that a Divine nature in the Third Person is 
 subject to the human nature in Christ ; but that 
 God hath made it the office of our Mediator's glo- 
 rified humanity, to be the cistern that shall first 
 receive the waters of life, and convey them by 
 pipes of His appointed means to all the offices of 
 His House : or to be the Head of the animal spirits, 
 and by nerves to convey to all the members." 13 
 
 The considerations adduced will supply an 
 answer to the question, whether the disputes re- 
 specting Regeneration are a mere affair of words, 
 and whether a reconciliation may be effected 
 among the various parties in the Church, between 
 whom it is contested. For if the dispute respect 
 nothing but the terms employed, and no real dif- 
 ference exist respecting the things intended, the 
 two parties only require to understand one an- 
 other, in order to be at concord. But if men are 
 at variance respecting the things themselves, if in 
 their belief the two parties are discordant, any ad- 
 ditional light which is thrown upon the subject 
 will only increase their perception of the discre- 
 pancy. Now it would seem, from what has been 
 said, that their exists both a mere verbal mis- 
 understanding, which might easily be healed, and 
 also a real difference in belief, which no expla- 
 nation will do away with. There are some per- 
 sons who are offended by the term Baptismal Re- 
 generation, because they think it inconsistent with 
 
 12 " The Christian Directory," part iii. Qucs. 42. 
 
140 PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE 
 
 a sense of the importance and reality of conver- 
 sion. They admit that some spiritual gift is be- 
 stowed in Infant Baptism, but they think that the 
 "full Baptismal blessing," to employ a phrase 
 of Mr. Goode's, is only attained in riper years ; 
 when the understanding and will of the recipient 
 has apprehended and done justice to the endow- 
 ment, which in Baptism had really been bestowed 
 by the Giver. They think it dangerous, therefore, 
 to speak of Baptismal regeneration, because they 
 suppose that men will of necessity confound 
 the initial state of the Christian progress with its 
 stages of subsequent development. Such an ob- 
 jection is surely ill-founded ; it leads to a phrase- 
 ology not sanctioned by Scripture or the Church, 
 and opens the door for greater misapprehensions. 
 But in this case the difference of words is greater 
 than that of things : and therefore it may be hoped 
 that further explanation may abate it. And in the 
 mean time it is not too much to ask such persons 
 to employ the Church's words, while they are al- 
 lowed free scope for such explanations as may 
 satisfy their own conscience. 
 
 But it is otherwise when the diversity in ideas 
 is greater than that in expressions. For there are 
 doubtless those, whose general belief in the whole 
 Sacrametal system is only brought out by that pecu- 
 liar test which is afforded by the question of Bap- 
 tismal Regeneration. That which distinguishes them 
 from the parties last mentioned, is their denial tlu L 
 any spiritual gift is actually bestowed in Baptism by 
 virtue of Christ's appointment. If any spiritual 
 benefit is bestowed on infants in Baptism, they say 
 that it is due to some qualification by which the re- 
 
OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. 141 
 
 cipients are distinguished ; such as the Christian 
 profession and piety of their parents or sponsors, or 
 a previous gift of grace bestowed supernaturally 
 upon themselves, or the prevision of their future 
 conduct ; otherwise, they say, that infants leave the 
 font as they came to it : the communication of any 
 spiritual gift to all infants duly baptized, they abso- 
 lutely deny. Now, it is plain that such persons do 
 not expect the renewal of man's nature from any 
 actual engrafting in the manhood of Christ, but from 
 a Divine power acting according to some other law. 
 For unless there be a communication of gifts through 
 those principles of nature which lie in the human 
 receiver, they deny not only, which all admit, that 
 the blessing is used, but also that any blessing is 
 given. And thus do they abandon one main part 
 of the Mediation of Christ, that in His Man's na- 
 ture commenced that re-creation of humanity, which 
 is actually bestowed on all His members. And 
 though they may continue to believe the reality of 
 Our Lord's Sacrifice, and the value of His Interces- 
 sion, yet it is obvious that these doctrines also must 
 lose much of their force and meaning, when they 
 are forcibly rent away from the other portions of His 
 wondrous Mediation. So that it is only a question 
 of time and circumstances, whether such persons 
 will not follow the various bodies of Continental 
 Protestants, who have passed from a denial of Our 
 Lord's Sacramental Presence to a denial of His na- 
 ture. And, therefore, it is plain that an irreconcila- 
 ble hostility exists between such opinions and those 
 of the Church. It is an hostility which explanation 
 and inquiry can only increase. Neither can the gulf 
 between them be bridged over, unless the parties in 
 
1 42 THI 
 
 question are converted to a belief in the full doctrine 
 of Our Lord's Mediation, or the English Church 
 loses her claim to be any longer a portion of the 
 Church Catholic, by renouncing the doctrine of the 
 Cross. Now, may God in His mercy grant us to 
 behold the first, and may no vain hope of an unreal 
 conciliation expose us to the second. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 HOW FAR BELIEF IN BAPTISMAL REGENERATION IS 
 CONSISTENT WITH ADHERENCE TO CALVINISM. 
 
 The question which remains for inquiry, is that 
 new ground, upon which Mr. Goode has placed his 
 opposition to the doctrine of Baptismal Regenera- 
 tion — its incompatibility with the tenets of Calvin. 
 This subject naturally follows the considerations 
 which have hitherto been adduced, because by ad- 
 mitting the charges of Laurence, and denying the 
 assertion of Scott, Mr. Goode transfers his opposi- 
 tion from the ground on which the doctrine of Bap- 
 tismal Regeneration is founded, to the doctrine it- 
 self. His objection is not to the premises, but to 
 the result. You may assert, he says, that Baptis- 
 mal Regeneration is taught by Scripture and held 
 by the Church ; but without inquiring into the 
 grounds on which the assertion is rested, we can 
 show the conclusion to be incorrect. In the pre- 
 vious chapters, which contained the reasons for 
 which this doctrine is to be believed, Mr. Goode's 
 pages were but incidentally referred to ; but in what 
 follows, it becomes necessary to meet his statements 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 143 
 
 more expressly. If premises only were disputed, 
 they might be confirmed, or new ones suggested ; 
 but when the conclusion is declared to be impossi- 
 ble, its truth cannot be established except by over- 
 throwing the opposite hypothesis. 
 
 Mr. Goode's assertions are the following: first, 
 That those who composed the Church's offices were 
 themselves Calvinists ; secondly, that if this were 
 not the case, yet that many distinguished persons 
 in our Church, who were plainly designed to be 
 included within her pale, were Calvinists ; thirdly, 
 that the Calvinistic doctrines of Election, Predes- 
 tination, and Perseverance, are incompatible w r itb 
 the admission of Baptismal Regeneration. In as- 
 serting the first point, Mr. Goode seems occasionally 
 to feel the weakness of his ground ; while, respect- 
 ing the second, he plainly speaks like a man who 
 thinks his position impregnable : the third he ap- 
 pears to suppose may be taken for granted, provided 
 Baptismal Regeneration be understood to imply 
 that real communication of spiritual gifts, which has 
 been all along contended for in these pages. I 
 shall endeavour to show — first, That the composers 
 or compilers of our Church's offices were not Cal- 
 vinists ; secondly, that the prevalence of partial 
 Calvinism in the Church, at one period in her his- 
 tory, makes nothing for Mr. Goode's argument; 
 and thirdly, I shall consider hfow far a belief in the 
 doctrines of Election, Predestination, and Perse- 
 verance, is incompatible with a belief in Baptismal 
 Regeneration. It will be most convenient to begin 
 with the last of these three subjects, which shall be 
 treated of in the present Chapter. 
 
 The doctrines of Election, Predestination, and 
 
144 
 
 Perseverance, were not broached for the first time, 
 when Calvin reared his intellectual empire at 
 Geneva. They rest upon statements of Holy 
 Scripture, and had received a certain form in the 
 early Church. What was that form, and how was 
 it modified by the Genevese teacher ? That which 
 leads the way to these doctrines, and forms the 
 basis on which they are built, is plainly the truth of 
 God's Prescience. Among the attributes of the 
 Most High, universal knowledge is neither less 
 certain nor less astonishing than unlimited power. 
 That all things, past, present, and to come, are 
 spread out as in a map before the Supreme Intelli- 
 gence, is a part of what we design, when we speak 
 of God's Omniscience. " Known unto God are 
 all His works from the beginning of the world." 
 Insomuch that to deny this truth, is to deny the 
 existence of God, 1 since by God we mean a Being, 
 infinite both in power and knowledge. And there- 
 fore, as to bestow upon His creatures the property 
 of volition is within His power, so to foresee their 
 voluntary actions is within His knowledge. Such 
 foreknowledge, however, does not in itself detract 
 from the voluntary nature of the actions which are 
 foreknown, nor therefore from the responsibility of 
 the actors ; for there is no more reason why the 
 fore-knowledge of the Omniscient should interfere 
 with the free-agency of the beings who are its 
 objects, than the after-knowledge of His limited 
 creatures. 2 
 
 1 " Qui non est prsescius omnium futurorum, non est utique 
 Deus."— De Civ. Dei. v. 9. 
 
 2 " Nullo modo cogimur aut retenta prscscientia Dei, tollere 
 voluntatis arbitrium, aut retento voluntatis arbitrio, Deum, quod 
 nefas est, negare prascium futurorum." — De Civ. Dei. v. 10. 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 145 
 
 But it is otherwise, when w T e pass from the re- 
 gion of foreknowledge to that of pre -appointment. 
 We now come to something which, so far as it 
 goes, is an interference with the free-agency, 
 and, therefore, w T ith the responsibility of men. 
 The question is, in what manner, and to what 
 degree are they interfered with ? And this is a 
 thing, respecting which we must refer to Holy 
 Writ. For in Scripture we read of various decrees 
 promulgated respecting the condition of man, 
 either previous or subsequent to the Fall. The 
 original decree preceded the Fall, and means 
 were no doubt afforded to the race of man for 
 carrying it into execution. It referred to that au- 
 thority, which man should exercise in the world 
 as God's vicegerent, and to those properties of 
 mind and body, whereby he was qualified for so 
 high a trust. " God said, let us make man in 
 our image, after our likeness : and let them have 
 dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the 
 foul of the air, and over the cattle, and over all 
 the earth, and over every creeping thing that 
 creepeth upon the earth." Here was a decree 
 respecting man, which pointed out his place 
 in the universe of created kings, and rested it 
 upon that likeness to the great Creator, wmereb;/ 
 he was enabled to hold intercourse with the Su- 
 preme Spirit, after whom he was framed. Yet 
 this first decree did not destroy the free-agency 
 of the being to whom it related, for through 
 Adam's voluntary sin its operation was stopped, 
 and its design defeated. And then came a period, 
 the only period in the history of man, when his 
 race might be said to be wholly in a state of na- 
 13 
 
146 the church's doctrine 
 
 ture, to be left to itself, and to be without God in 
 the world. For that which the Apostle speaks of 
 as the state of those who have cast off God, was 
 the state of man at large, after he had fallen from 
 original grace, and before a new promise of grace 
 w T as given. And now, then, it seemed that Sa- 
 tan's purpose was accomplished, and that man's 
 fall was irretrievable. So that we hear of no at- 
 tempt on his part at recovery; there was no such 
 civil wisdom as might have sufficed for the con- 
 struction of society, nor such moral perception as 
 the Philosopher pretends. All these things were 
 forfeited, with that intercourse with God, which 
 man had lost. , He hid himself from his Maker's 
 presence in the shadows of the forest, like the 
 beasts. 
 
 Under these circumstances, the only hope of 
 man's recovery was in a fresh decree on the part 
 of his Maker. And that such a decree would go 
 forth, and what would be its consequences, had 
 been known beforehand to the Supreme Intelli- 
 gence, and had been part of His ordination, even 
 when He beheld it as consequent upon that volun- 
 tary act of our first parent, whereby he was the 
 free author of his own ruin. For that which was 
 " manifest in these last times" was " fore-ordained 
 before the foundation of the world." Now of 
 what nature was this new decree, which was to 
 be brought forth out of the treasures of eternal 
 mercy ? What were the means by which the 
 race of man might be re-created ? The decree 
 was proclaimed in the promise of the woman's 
 seed, by whom the serpent-enemy was to be 
 trodden under foot. And after this promise had 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 147 
 
 been gradually unfolded to succeeding Prophets, 
 it was more plainly set forth to two among the 
 latest teachers of Israel. To Isaiah was revealed 
 the divine character of the coming deliverer — 
 "Immanuel, God with us" — and also that He 
 would take upon Himself that burden under 
 which humanity was groaning — for the transgres- 
 sion of My people was He stricken : to Daniel 
 corresponding truths were exhibited by vision. 
 He saw how the Humanity of Christ was dug out 
 of the mine of man's nature without man's parti- 
 cipation— " a stone cut out of a mountain with- 
 out hands" — and again, he saw the future exten- 
 sion of that kingdom, which the new Heir of 
 man's nature was predestined to establish. " I 
 saw in the night-visions, and behold one like the 
 Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and 
 came to the Ancient of days, and they brought 
 Him near before Him. And there was given 
 Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that 
 all people, nations, and languages, should serve 
 Him ; His dominion is an everlasting dominion, 
 which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that 
 which shall not be destroyed." In this way did 
 the Most High declare His Predestination of that 
 kingdom, which was to be set up by " My ser- 
 vant, whom I uphold, Mine elect, in whom My 
 soul delighteth." For the title of elect is espe- 
 cially bestowed on the Incarnate Son, whose hu- 
 manity was taken out of the mass of man's nature, 
 that He might be the new Adam, the fresh "be- 
 ginning of the creation of God." He is said to 
 be "My servant whom I have chosen." For as 
 the old decree had regarded in the first instance 
 
148 the church's doctkine 
 
 our original Father, and then had contemplated 
 the human race, as receiving in Him, and through 
 Him, the blessings of nature, so did the new de- 
 cree regard first the Head of the renewed race, 
 and see in him those spiritual members, to whom 
 from His Humanity were to be communicated 
 the blessings of grace. For this is the great con- 
 trast which it pleased God to establish — the 
 blessings of nature through the first, the blessings 
 of grace through the Second Adam. These are 
 the two decrees : the first whereof was frustrated 
 by the Fall, whereas, by the second the Fall is 
 remedied. For according to this second decree, 
 whatever spiritual benefits were designed for 
 man's race are embodied in the Son of Man, that 
 He might be the new " first-born of every crea- 
 ture." Thus is the last first, and the first last; 
 and the true Joseph is found to be that real 
 u chosen one," through whom all his brethren 
 have access to royal favour. 
 
 This is the view of the decree of Election, which 
 prevailed from the first in the Church. It is set 
 forth in the clearest terms by the very earliest of 
 the Fathers. " The All-seeing God, who hath 
 elected the Lord Jesus Christ, and us through Him 
 to be a peculiar people." 3 And this accordingly is 
 declared in the New Testament to be the fulfilment 
 of that decree, which had been announced in the 
 Old. Our Lord Jesus Christ is declared to be " the 
 elect, m whom the Father is well pleased." 4 And 
 
 3 li o rtavorttrj; ®sb$ — j £x?.t$dusvo; tbv Kvpiovl^rsolv Xpiarbv, 
 xcul r,uttj dV aiitov £tj Xabv rttpiovaiov." — Clem. Rom, ad Cor 
 i. 58. 
 
 4 Compare Isaiah xlii. 1, and St. Matt. xii. 18. 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 149 
 
 this election is extended from Him to others. The 
 decree, of which the first Adam had been the sub- 
 ject, had contemplated his race as well as himself, 
 since how else could the earth be replenished ? al- 
 beit that to infinite Wisdom the result must from 
 the first have been apparent : but respecting the 
 Second Adam, it is expressly declared that in His 
 case the decree of mercy would not be equally in- 
 effectual. " He shall see His seed, He shall pro- 
 long His days." " He shall see of the travail of 
 His soul, and shall be satisfied." It was predes- 
 tined that in Him should be gathered together that 
 Gentile Church, of which the election of the Jew- 
 ish nation had been a preparatory shadow. " And 
 now, saith the Lord, that formed Me from the 
 womb, to be His servant — it is a light thing that 
 Thou shouldst be My servant to raise up the tribes 
 of Jacob, I will also give thee for a light to the 
 Gentiles, that Thou mayest be My salvation unto 
 the ends of the earth." The building up of that 
 universal Church, which consists of all living mem- 
 bers of the Incarnate Mediator, was always under- 
 stood in the earliest times to be the fulfilment of the 
 decree of God's Predestination. " Whereas God 
 had taken to Himself your people," says Justin 
 Martyr to his Jewish opponent, " out of all nations, 
 an useless, disobedient, and unbelieving race, He 
 has now shown that those who are elected 5 out of 
 every nation obey His counsel through Christ." 6 
 And again, " we are no contemptible people, but 
 God has elected us, and become merciful to them 
 
 5 "Electa; sunt gentium nafionep, ut destrueretuv perfidia Ju- 
 dseorum." — S. Ambros. on Ps. xliii. 
 
 6 Dial, cum Tryph. sec. 130 Id. sec. 119. 
 
150 
 
 which asked not for Him." This it is, then, which 
 the Apostle sets forth, when he explains how the 
 whole Church is included in the operation of that 
 merciful decree, which assigned a new Head to the 
 human race. " Blessed be the God and Father of 
 Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with 
 all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ, 
 according as He hath chosen us in Hun before the 
 foundation of the "world, that we should be holy 
 and without blame before Him in love ; having 
 predestinated us to the adoption of children by Je- 
 sus Christ to Himself, according to the good plea- 
 sure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His 
 grace, wherein He hath made us accepted in the 
 Beloved. In whom we have redemption through 
 His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the 
 riches of His grace ; wherein He hath abounded to 
 us in all wisdom and prudence, having made 
 known unto us the mystery of His will, according 
 to His good pleasure, which He hath purposed in 
 Himself: that in the dispensation of the fulness of 
 times He might gather together in one, all things in 
 Christ." 
 
 Now respecting this predestined election of 
 Christians to be one body in Christ, there are two 
 points to be observed — First, That it in no wise 
 interferes with the responsibility of man ; secondly, 
 What is the nature of that safety, which it is said 
 to afford ? It does not interfere with man's re- 
 sponsibility. For it has been stated to depend 
 upon that law of Mediation, whereby all blessings 
 which God bestows upon men are given through 
 the intervention of the new Head of humanity. 
 " There is one Mediator between God and men, 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 151 
 
 the Man Christ Jesus." Through our Baptism 
 into Him is that nature reconstituted which is 
 transmitted by birth from our first Parent. For the 
 law of Christ's Mediation not only refers to His 
 actions on our behalf as our Advocate with the 
 Father, but likewise to that channel which He has 
 provided in His own humanity, whereby He may 
 bestow heavenly gifts upon men. This point was 
 brought prominently forward in the Pelagian con- 
 troversy. The Pelagians were ready to admit that 
 through Christ's Mediation we obtained remission 
 of our sins, but they did not allow the necessity of 
 that new mean of connexion with the Father, 
 whereby we obtain the blessing of a re-created na- 
 ture, through baptismal union with the Humanity 
 of Christ. The Council of Milevis therefore 
 passed a censure on those who said, " that the 
 grace of God, whereby we are justified through Je- 
 sus Christ our Lord, avails only for the remission 
 of sins past, and not for help against their future 
 commission." 7 And therefore it is that the efficacy 
 of Baptism formed so large a part of the contro- 
 versy between St. Augustin and his opponents. 
 But although the Divine nature which is commu- 
 nicated by Baptism, extends as widely as that old 
 nature through which we inherit corruption, yet it 
 does not so far re-create us, as to supersede that 
 principle of individuality which previously existed. 
 In each child of Adam there is not only that gene- 
 ral nature, which we have in common with our 
 race, but likewise that principle of individual ex- 
 istence which enables us to speak of ourselves. 
 
 7 Hard uin, vol. i. p. 1218. 
 
152 
 
 The baptized man remains the same individual, 
 which he was before Baptism. His nature may be 
 improved, but his identity is unaffected. The 
 Apostle speaks to those, who had been brought 
 into the fold of Christ, as conscious that they were 
 bound by the tie of human personality to their for- 
 mer existence. " Remember that ye being in times 
 past Gentiles in the flesh — that at that time ye were 
 without Christ. But now in Christ Jesus ye who 
 sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood 
 of Christ. " Now it is this individual personality, 
 whereby we are enabled to speak of ourselves, with 
 which the principle of responsibility is indissolubly 
 connected. We discern its existence, independent- 
 ly of the Word of God, through that law of con- 
 sciousness which is bound up with our individual 
 existence. However far, therefore, the new na- 
 ture which is given in Christ may leaven the old 
 — however it may augment our power of suggest- 
 ing to ourselves motives — whatever influence it 
 may exercise over the will, by corroborating it in 
 all good resolutions — yet there remains a principle 
 of responsibility, which cannot be detached from 
 ourselves. This responsibility acted in one way 
 according to the law of nature ; it acts in another 
 according to the law of grace. In both cases its 
 decisions were contingent, in that they depended 
 upon the choice of a responsible being; but they 
 were not the less foreseen by the Supreme Intelli- 
 gence, and were linked, therefore, into the chain 
 of His unalterable counsels, just as much as if 
 they had been wholly irrespective of our own will. 
 But although its choice is foreseen, and though it 
 acts at different times under circumstances of more 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 153 
 
 or less advantage, yet the principle of responsibi- 
 lity itself remains untouched, and cannot be de- 
 tached from the personality of God's reasonable 
 creatures. 
 
 When we go on to consider the nature of that 
 safety, which is promised to us in the Christian 
 kingdom, we must remember what are the dangers, 
 by which we are surrounded. For these dangers 
 do not arise merely from our own weakness, but 
 from the assaults of external enemies. There exists 
 around us an actual kingdom of darkness, which 
 had no place, indeed, in the pure nature of our first 
 parent, but which, by reason of their own sins and 
 his, has power over all his descendants. Nothing 
 is more plainly declared in Scripture than the ex- 
 istence of such a danger, and men who watch their 
 own hearts will see reason to suppose that they can 
 trace its operations. " For w T e w r restle not against 
 flesh and blood, but against principalities, against 
 powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this 
 world against spiritual wickedness in high places." 
 And if this be so, we have ample ground for desiring 
 that succour, which may guard us from such as- 
 saults. And this it is, which the Head of the 
 Christian Body has secured for His members. 
 When He " beheld Satan as lightning fall from 
 heaven," He conquered for His members as well 
 as for Himself. To this external aggression He 
 makes especial reference, when speaking of the 
 security of His servants. u I give unto them eter- 
 nal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall 
 any one pluck them out of My hand. My Father, 
 which gave them Me is greater than all, and no one 
 is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand." 
 
154 
 
 Thus is the decree of God's predestination ("My 
 Father which gave them Me",) and the assurance 
 of Christian perseverance, connected with preser- 
 vation against an external foe. And this assertion 
 is wholly beside the question, what use may be 
 made of this blessing. It leaves untouched the 
 question of human responsibility. For afterwards 
 occurs Our Lord's own statement of the manner in 
 which, while upon earth, He had afforded this pro- 
 tection. " While I was with them in the world I 
 kept them in Thy name ; those that Thou gavest 
 Me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the 
 son of perdition." Thus does it appear that one 
 who was within the sentence of God's predesti- 
 nation, so far as to be given to Christ, and who, 
 therefore, was kept by Christ from external assaults, 
 had notwithstanding become the son of perdition. 
 So that we may receive the full statement of God's 
 predestination and of the perseverance of His true 
 servants, without in any wise trenching on that law 
 of responsibility, w T hich in every circumstance re- 
 mains untouched. The course of the Divine deal- 
 ings has been directed in conformity with the mer- 
 ciful decree of His will, to provide a fresh beginning 
 of man's race in place of that old one, in whom it 
 originally began. Through union with this new 
 Head has He predetermined to give security against 
 Satan's assaults to Christ's living members. This 
 end is effected through that calling, acceptance, 
 and exaltation, which He has bestowed upon them 
 through the ordinances of grace, whereby they are 
 engrafted into His Church. Thus is the predesti- 
 nation of the Head consummated in the Body. 
 "For whom He did foreknow He also did predesti- 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 155 
 
 nate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that 
 He might be the first-born among many brethren. 
 Moreover, whom He did predestinate, them He 
 also called: and whom He called, them He also 
 justified : and whom He justified, them He also 
 glorified. What shall we then say to these things ? 
 If God be for us, who can be against us ? He that 
 spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for 
 us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give 
 ws all things ?" " For I am persuaded that neither 
 death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor 
 powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor 
 height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be 
 able to separate us from the love of God, which is 
 in Christ Jesus Our Lord." 
 
 What, then, is the Church's doctrine of Predes- 
 tination, Election, and Perseverance, but a repre- 
 sentation of the fact of Mediation, as it shines re- 
 flected in the mirror of the Divine Foreknowledge? 
 Those things which it has pleased the Almighty to 
 effect upon this scene of time, in that grand trans- 
 action between Him and His creatures, it has been 
 His will to reveal in Holy Writ as they were the 
 subject of His own contemplation and decree, 
 amidst the solemn stillness of eternity. Of this de- 
 cree the first and immediate object was the new 
 Head of humanity, and in and through Him all 
 His believing members. For "He hath chosen us 
 in Him before the foundation of the world." There- 
 fore does St. Augustin speak of " the Saviour, the 
 Mediator between God and man," as " the especial 
 light of predestination and grace." In our Head, 
 therefore, let us discern the very fountain of grace, 
 whence according to each man's measure it diffuses 
 
156 THE 
 
 itself to all His members. For that grace, whereby 
 the whole process is accomplished, through which 
 every faithful man becomes a Christian, is the self- 
 same principle whereby humanity was first moulded 
 into Christ in Him ; by the same Spirit whereby 
 the one was born, is the other regenerate. By the 
 same Spirit, whereby the one has forgiveness of 
 sins, was the other always sinless. These w T ere 
 things which God foreknew that He would accom- 
 plish. The predestination, therefore, of the saints 
 is that doctrine which shone in the Saint of saints 
 with such transcendent glory ; w T hich, who there- 
 fore, that understands rightly the oracles of truth, 
 can deny ? For the Lord of glory Himself, so far 
 as the Son of God was partaker of Humanity, is de- 
 clared to us to have been predestinated. The 
 Apostle of the Gentiles proclaims at the opening of 
 his Epistles, " Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, 
 called to be an Apostle, separated unto the Gospel 
 of God, which he had promised before by His 
 prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His 
 Son, who was made of the seed of David according 
 to the flesh, who was predestinated to be the Son 
 of God in power, according iothe Spirit of Holiness 
 by the resurrection from the dead." Jesus there- 
 fore was predestinated, that He, who was to be the 
 Son of David according to the flesh, might yet be 
 the Son ot God in power, according to the Spirit of 
 holiness, because He was born of the Holy Ghost 
 and the Virgin Mary. This wondrous assumption 
 of humanity by God the Word was brought about 
 in some unspeakable manner, that so He might 
 truly and with propriety be said to be at once the 
 Son of God and the Son of man — the Son of man 
 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 157 
 
 by reason of the humanity which He had assumed, 
 the Son of God by reason of that only-begotten 
 Deity which assumed manhood — lest the truth ot 
 the Trinity might be obscured, and we might be- 
 lieve that there was a fourth God. It was the de- 
 cree, therefore, of God's predestination, that huma- 
 nity should receive that mighty elevation, than 
 which there could be no higher stage of advance- 
 ment ; and likewise that Deity should submit to 
 that deepest of all humiliations — participation in 
 the weakness of flesh, and the death upon the 
 cross. As respecting Him alone, therefore there 
 passed that decree of predestination, whereby he 
 was appointed our Head : so respecting us, being 
 many, is there a like decree of predestination, 
 wheieby we are appointed to be His members." 8 
 
 There is one material distinction, however, 
 which it is necessary to bear in mind, when we 
 read the statements of the Church's early writers 
 respecting the decrees of God. It has been 
 stated that these decrees were the shadow cast 
 beforehand by that momentous system of Media- 
 tion, which took effect through the Incarnation 
 of Christ. Now there are two ways, in which 
 the ancient writers speak of those things which 
 were decreed by God in Christ: sometimes they 
 speak of them in regard to their gift, and some- 
 times in regard to their employment. In the first 
 case they simply affirm the fact of the gift ; what 
 
 8 " Ip?a est igitur prsedestinatio sanctorum, quae in Sancto 
 sanctorum maxime claruit." ''Sieut ergo prsedestinatus est 
 ille unus, ut caput nostrum esset; ita multi prtedestinati sumus, 
 ut membra ejus e?semus." 
 
 St. Austin follows the Vulgate in reading Rom. i. 4. "Qui 
 pradestinatus est Filius Dei," &c. — De Pried. Sa?ic. sec. 31. 
 
 14 
 
158 
 
 they say in the second depends upon its improve- 
 ment. Looking at the first, they speak of Saul 
 and Judas as participators in election, 9 but when 
 they speak of God's Decrees under their second 
 character, they refer to those cases, in which the 
 due use of divine gifts leads to man's final salva- 
 tion. Now, in exact accordance with this two- 
 fold language respecting the nature of a state of 
 Election and Predestination, there is a corres- 
 ponding diversity in their statements of its cause. 
 When they look only at the gift, they refer God's 
 Decree to that mere mercy, which works accord- 
 ing to the counsel of His own sovereign will. 
 But when they take its employment also into 
 account, they speak of the decree of God as in- 
 fluenced by a foreknowledge of man's conduct. 
 In this case, therefore, the sentence passed in the 
 Divine Councils is an anticipation of that law, - by 
 which the Giver of all grace has declared that 
 He is guided in His conduct towards His crea 
 tures : "he that hath, to him shall be given." 
 Bearing this distinction in mind, we may see why 
 God's Decrees are sometimes spoken of as certain 
 in their effect, and sometimes as liable to be 
 modified in consequence of human ingratitude ; 10 
 why the good are saved through God's predes- 
 tined mercy in Christ, and through the gift of 
 
 9 "Blandiri sibi per confessionem non potest, quasi sit elcctus 
 ad glorias premium — nam et Judam inter Apostolos Dominus 
 digit," &e. — Cyprian de Unitate. 
 
 " Nee statim, qui eligitur, tentari non potest ncc perire : quia 
 et Saul clectus in regem, ct Judas in apostolum, suo postea vitio 
 corruerunt." — Micron in Ezech. xx. 
 
 10 "Si cum dicis, Praedestinatus non potest damnari, intelligas 
 ita, id est, non potest esse ut praedestinatus sit et damnetur, 
 vcrum dicis." — Lib. Sententiarum. i. 40. 13. 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 159 
 
 perseverance; while the bad cannot charge their 
 failure on the arbitrary denial of what was essen- 
 tial to their safety. Not only are these considera- 
 tions necessary, if we would make different 
 writers of the ancient Church consistent with 
 one another, but even if we would make the 
 same writer consistent with himself. Thus do 
 St. Ignatius and Hennas 11 speak of the Church 
 as owing its calling simply to the will of God, 
 while Clement 13 of Alexandria, a writer of the 
 same century, speaks of it as comprising those 
 whom God "foreknew would be righteous." In 
 the former instance God's Decree is viewed in 
 relation only to the gift which He bestows upon 
 mankind ; in the latter, His Decree is thought of 
 as extending onward into that ultimate effect, 
 which results from it in the case of the obedient. 
 This is still more manifest if we consider the op- 
 position which would otherwise arise between 
 different assertions of the same writer. Thus 
 does Jerome censure Origen, because he " at- 
 tempts to prove the justice of God, on the ground 
 that He elects each person, not from His simple 
 exercise of inherent foreknowledge, but from the 
 merit of the individuals elected." Whereas, he 
 says, u God elected us, who were not previously 
 holy and immaculate, in order that hereafter we 
 
 11 Tw rtpocapLdfievyj rfpo ouwvcoy, — iv OeTirpatt, tov TTar'poj xai 
 \r",' v Xpecfou tov 0JGU ^uwi', fg tarjcX^ita tq ovay if 'E$£ff<j> 
 
 • — lgn m ad E])h. sec. i. 
 
 " Detis virtute sua potenti conditit sanctum ecclesiam suam." 
 —Past. i. 1, 3. 
 
 12 " Tot's rSq xat at tray fitvovc, ov$ rtpotopcrffv u Osog, 8(.xo.lov$ 
 ilofxevovs rtpo xata^oXr^ xoopov tyvwxujs." — Clem. Alex. Strom 
 vii. p. 900. Oxf. 1715. 
 
160 
 
 might become so." 13 Yet the same Jerome says, 
 " those of whom God foresaw that they would be 
 conformed to the image of His Son in life, He 
 willed also should be conformed to it in glory." 14 
 Here we have the Decree of God set forth in one 
 case as being independent of men's acts, in the 
 other as being contingent upon the use which 
 they make of it. In every case, therefore, it is 
 the system of Mediation which is the object of 
 God's prevision ; in the one instance extending 
 its blessings unconditionally to mankind, in the 
 other leading to the ultimate salvation of those 
 who employ it. 
 
 And this is still more manifest when we turn to 
 that period of the Church's history, when the doc- 
 trines of Grace were brought most prominently for- 
 ward — the contest, namely, which was carried on 
 by St. Augustin against the Pelagians. For that 
 controversy did not turn on the question whether 
 men needed divine help, which Pelagius did not 
 deny, but whether the help which they were ad- 
 mitted to require, was to be expected through the 
 channel of nature, or the channel of grace — whether 
 it was to be referred to the principles of our creation 
 through the first, or of our re-creation through the 
 Second Adam. The qualities and capacities of man 
 are so plainly God's work, his affections and intel- 
 lect are so entirely dependent upon the sustaining 
 hand of their author, that those things which are 
 brought about by them, might be said to be brought 
 about by a power which is bestowed by their author. 
 
 13 Hieron. Comment, in E plies, i. 
 
 14 Hieron. Comment, in Rom. viii. 29. Other passages are 
 quoted in Faber's "Primitive Doctrine of Election," p. 271, 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 161 
 
 Pelagius, indeed, appeared to go beyond this in his 
 admissions. " If he asserted that man could be 
 perfect without the help of God," said his friends 
 at the Synod of Jerusalem, "this were most mis- 
 chievous and censurable ; but since he adds, that 
 this cannot be attained without God's help, what 
 do you say? — do you deny God's help?" 15 Still, 
 however, all his concessions come back, in the end, 
 to the same point — the help which he acknowledged 
 was bestowed through the medium of nature, and 
 according to the law T sof the first creation ; whereas, 
 the improvement for which St. Augustin contended 
 was built upon a new principle ; upon the re-crea- 
 tion of man in Christ." " The Pelagians assert," 
 say the African Bishops, "that the grace of God 
 lies in this circumstance, that He has so constituted 
 and created man's nature, that man can, by his own 
 will, fulfil God's law." 16 And again, the five 
 Bishops who addressed Pope Innocent, contrast the 
 statement of Pelagius, " that the nature with which 
 man was created, evinces his Creator's grace," 
 with their own assertion, " that assisting grace was 
 revealed and given through the Incarnation of the 
 only-begotten Son." 17 Thus did the whole contro- 
 versy turn upon the fact, whether grace was a result 
 of the re-creation of man's nature through Christ, or 
 whether it was to be looked for through the channel 
 
 w Harduin, i. 1208. 
 
 16 Id. i. 1214. Vide also St. Augustin's Letter to Sixtus, who 
 was afterwards Pope : " Abjieiatur a Christianorum cordibus ista 
 fallacia: nam omnino non istam gratiam commendat Apostolus, 
 qua creati sumus ut homines essemus, scd qua justificati, cum 
 mali homines essemus. Ista est enim gratia per Jcsum Christum 
 Dominum nostrum." — Ep. cxeiv. sec. viii. 
 
 17 Harduin, i. 1226-8. 
 
162 
 
 of our original constitution. And therefore the 
 Church's doctrine on this subject did not trench in 
 any degree upon the accountableness of man. For 
 if the Divine Decrees are bound to that system by 
 which it has been shown that man's common nature 
 is altered, but by which the principle of responsibility 
 is left untouched, they do but secure that free- 
 agency, which is only perfectly restored 18 in Christ. 
 And when the reference to God's decrees was car- 
 ried further, and they were spoken of in their ap- 
 plication to those chosen members of the Lord's 
 Body, who will share its ultimate advancement, it 
 was never forgotten that such a result was contin- 
 gent upon the due use of those blessings, which 
 were dependent for their beginning upon man's free 
 election into Christ. Thus were the springs of re- 
 sponsibility left untouched, 19 while the privileges of 
 the Gospel w T ere made to depend exclusively upon 
 that free grace, which had been communicated to 
 humanity in the Incarnate Saviour. 
 
 And the same principles were involved when the 
 controversy went deeper into the mysterious ground 
 of human responsibility. The dispute between St. 
 Augustin and Pelagius had been — whether the as- 
 sistance of God's grace was bestowed according to 
 the system of Mediation, or the system of nature. 
 
 18 This is stated in that collection of the opinion of the Koman 
 Bishops, which was put out under the authority of Celestine: 
 "Nemo nisi per Christum libero bene utatur arbitrio." — liar- 
 duw, i. 1255. 
 
 19 Vide the statements referred to Celestine : " Quo utique 
 auxilio et munere Dei non aufertur liberum arbitrium, sod libe- 
 ratur." " Tanta enim erga omncs homines est bonitas Dei, ut 
 nostra velit esse mcrita, quae sunt ipsius dona," &c. — Harduin, 
 i. 1257. 
 
CF DIVINE DECREES. 163 
 
 Though Pelagius admitted the truth of Our Lord's 
 satisfaction for sin, 23 yet he denied that whole the- 
 ory, which supposes divine grace to be commu- 
 nicated through the Mediator to mankind. But 
 the Church accepted with one consent the asser- 
 tions of St. Augustin, that as the gifts of nature 
 through the first, so were the gifts of grace be- 
 stowed upon mankind through the Second Adam. 
 All spiritual blessings were understood to be be- 
 stowed through the ordinances of the Church upon 
 the members of Christ's Body. This was the ex- 
 ternal medium through which grace was bestowed 
 by God upon man. But when this was admitted, 
 there arose of necessity the further question, By 
 what means were men induced to become mem- 
 bers of the Lord's Body ? What was the condition 
 of persons before Baptism ? Was man's dependence 
 after Baptism to be the grace of Christ, and before 
 Baptism the principles of nature ? Was there such 
 capacity for holiness in man natural, that he could 
 of himself have taken the first step towards God ? 
 Yet if not, it would seem that the only reason why 
 one man is converted, and another is not, must 
 depend upon God's decree ; and, therefore, that the 
 responsibility of man must be proportionately endan- 
 gered. For if the direct object of God's Decree be 
 that decision which results from the actings of man's 
 compound organization, and not that renewing 
 influence of the Incarnate Mediator, which is be- 
 stowed upon mankind at large for the re-creation of 
 his nature, it does not appear how individuals can 
 
 20 " Justificatio per peccatoram veniam." — Op. Imper. c. Fix- 
 lian. ii. 165. 
 
164 the church's doctrine 
 
 be held responsible 21 for that, over which they have 
 no control. From this difficulty Augustin 23 had at 
 one time been disposed to escape, by assigning a 
 meritorious efficacy to men's faith, which he denied 
 to their actions. This error is not uncommon among 
 those who speak much of fai;h, without discerning 
 its true ground of importance ; namely, that it is 
 correlative to that external system of Mediation, 
 whereby a real change has been effected in the 
 position of mankind. We are saved only by faith 
 in Christ, not because faith is of more value in itself 
 than the other parts of our constitution, but by 
 reason of the worthless nature of those acts of our 
 own, of w T hich sense acquaints us ; whereas those 
 acts of the Man Christ Jesus, which are the objects 
 of faith, are of countless efficacy. St. Augustin's 
 view of faith had rested apparently upon a different 
 principle ; he had observed that faith, when looked 
 at in itself, bears the same relation to its results, 
 which motives bear to actions ; and while he 
 affirmed that the second need the help of grace, he 
 supposed that power over our own motives could 
 not be separated from the free-agency of man. This, 
 however, was plainly to attribute men's conversion 
 to their own merits, and it was contrary to those 
 statements of Scripture, which refer faith to the gift 
 of God. And St. Augustin spoke a wholly different 
 
 21 " Si igitur non est Dei gratia, quomodo salvat mundum 1 
 Et si non est liberum arbitrium, quomodo judicat numdum." — • 
 Aug. Ep. 214. 2. 
 
 11 " Quod credimus nostrum est. Quod autem bonum ope- 
 ramur, illius, qui credentibus in se dat Spiritum Sanctum." 
 '• Non quidam Deus, elegit opera, qute ipse largitur, cum dat 
 Spiritual Sanctum, ut per charitatem bona opercmur ; sed tamen 
 elegit fidem." — Explicatio Prop, dc Epistola ab Rom. written 
 a. d.394. 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 16b 
 
 language, when the controversy with Pelagius led 
 him into deeper views of truth. He sums up the 
 dispute between them at the end of his treatise on 
 grace ; " If Pelagius will allow not only that the 
 human faculties, irrespective of our will and acts, 
 but that our will and acts themselves are divinely 
 assisted, and so assisted, that without such assist- 
 ance we can neither will well, nor act well ; and 
 that the mean whereby we are assisted is the grace 
 of God, through Jesus Christ Our Lord, whereby 
 He makes us righteous through His, and not through 
 our righteousness ; so that our true righteousness is 
 that which is given us by Him ; no controversy 
 respecting the assistance by God's grace, so far as I 
 understand, will be left between us." 23 
 
 At this point it was, then, that the dispute broke 
 out between St. Austin and the Semi-Pelagians. 
 The need of God's grace in Christ, as aiding the 
 actions of men, they readily admitted. But there 
 must first, they said, be a surrender of himself on 
 the part of man, in order to enable him to profit 
 by God's grace. And this first movement must 
 of necessity lie in his own nature. The gifts of 
 God flowed forth, they allowed, through the chan- 
 nel of Christ's Manhood, like the stream to thirsty 
 Israel ; but man must stoop down to profit by the, 
 draught. This, however, were to assert an inde- 
 pendence of the Creator, which the creature has no 
 pretention to advance. It had been objected against 
 the Pelagians by St. Jerome, 24 that they supposed 
 
 23 " De Gratia," sec. xlvii. 
 
 24 Vide Hieron. Ep. ad Ctesiphontem. " Deus cujus occulta 
 potentia cuncta penetrans incontaminabili prsesentia facit esso 
 quicquid aliquo modo est, in quantumcunque est, quia nisi faci- 
 ente illo non talc vel tale esset ; sed prorsus esse non posset.'"' 
 — De Civitaie Dei. xii. 25. 
 
166 
 
 the world to have been framed by a Divine Artificer, 
 and then to be left to pursue its course through the 
 agency of those principles, which had been origin- 
 ally infused. Whereas in reality there exists no 
 power, properly speaking, but the will of spiritual 
 beings ; and no power in material substance, save 
 that will of their Author, which still supports, as it 
 first called them into being. Now the same prin- 
 ciple, which is true in the natural world, is ap- 
 plicable to the spiritual. Here likewise, the 
 principles of Theism do not allow us to exclude the 
 agency of God, when it is not excluded by the 
 peculiar constitution of accountable beings. While 
 we bear in mind, therefore, that responsibility im- 
 plies the existence of a power of original action, we 
 cannot exclude the influence of God's agency from 
 any good actions of His rational creatures. But 
 according to what law is this agency exerted ? 
 Here the very question comes back upon us, which 
 we met with before in the controversy with the 
 Pelagians. Is this pre-disposing influence of the 
 Divine power, which has the wills of responsible 
 agents for its immediate object, bestowed through 
 the system of nature, or the system of Mediation ? 
 St. Austin maintained that it was bestowed through 
 the latter. As the Second Person in the Ever- 
 Blessed Trinity is the source of that natural light, 
 which still dwells even in the darkened consciences 
 of our fallen race, so still more is it from His 
 influence, and in anticipation of that light which 
 through full communion with Him He bestows 
 upon the true members of His Body, that the dawn- 
 ing and imperfect glimpses of the coming day draw 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 167 
 
 men to His presence. The especial gro und on 
 which St. Austin rests his proof of the efficacy of 
 preventing grace, is that it is implied by those 
 prayers, wnich the Church continually offered for 
 the conversion of unbelievers. For unless this 
 were a thing which was brought about by God's - 
 power, and not by the unaided exertion of indi- 
 vidual will, why should we ask God to grant it ? 
 Why should we petition Him for that, which He 
 had put out of His own power ? Now this princi- 
 ple is especially applied by Celestine, 25 when sum- 
 ming up the Church's decision against the Semi- 
 Pelagians, to whose prayers, which the Church 
 offers through Sacramental union with Christ ; and 
 the admission of Catechumens to her full privileges 
 by Baptism is stated to be its result. So that 
 although the gift of grace, which the Mediator 
 bestows through the channel of His man's nature, 
 exercises an attractive influence in those w r ho are 
 not yet members of His Body, yet it is through this 
 medium only that the blessing is transmitted. 
 
 This it is, then, which was asserted in that fa- 
 mous Council of Orange, which gives us the final 
 result of the Church's judgment on these momen- 
 tous questions. It expressly refers preventing 
 grace in those who are not Christians, to that 
 same anticipatory influence of the Incarnate Me- 
 diator, on which were built the hopes of the gene- 
 
 25 " Prater eas sanctiones, quibus nos piissimi patres ad 
 Christi gratiam referre docuerunt ; obsecrationum quoque sacer- 
 dutalium sacramenta respieiamus — ut legem credendi lex statuat 
 supplicandi." " Ut denique catechumenis ad regenerationis 
 sacratnenta perductis, ccelistis aula a ssericordise reseretur." — 
 Harduin, i. 1257. 
 
168 
 
 rations which preceded His Advent. And it sums 
 up its protest against the Semi-Pelagian doctrines 
 in these two assertions — first, that all the baptized 
 by the grace given to them in Baptism, have 
 through Christ's help the means of salvation ; se- 
 condly, that it is a detestable doctrine to suppose 
 that any persons are predestinated to evil by Di- 
 vine power. 23 Now the second of these positions 
 is a distinct nroof that the Fathers at Orange did 
 not consider that the ultimate determinations of 
 men were the first and immediate object of a 
 Divine Decree, since it is unquestionable that 
 these last determinations are often evil. And on 
 the other hand, we may learn from the first state- 
 ment what they supposed to be the object of the 
 Divine Predestination — namely, that Body of 
 Christ, to which through His Mediation, He trans- 
 mitted in measure those gifts of grace, of which 
 He was Himself the natural possessor. So that 
 we are led back again to the position before at- 
 tained. Election, Predestination, and Perse- 
 verance, w 7 ere supposed by the Church to be 
 conceptions, which existed from eternity in the 
 Divine Mind, and w T hich were acted out in that 
 majestic economy of the Divine dealings, which 
 had its commencement in the incarnation of the 
 Son of God. They express that law, whereby a 
 fresh hope w r as aiforded to the fallen race of man 
 
 20 " Hoc secundum fidcm catholicam credimus, quod accepta 
 per baptismum gratia, omnes baptizati, Christo auxiliante et co- 
 operante, qure ad salutem animse pertinent, possint et dcbcant, 
 si fideliter laborare voluerint, adimplere. Aliquos vero ad malum 
 divina potentate praedestinatosesse, nori solum non credimus, sed 
 ctiam, si sunt qui tatum malum credere velint, cum omni detes- 
 tatione illis anathema dicimus." — Harduin's Co?i. ii. 1101. 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 'iG'i 
 
 through the re-creation of his nature in Christ 
 Jesus. Regard them, therefore, in reference to 
 the gifts bestowed, and they are spoken of as re- 
 sulting exclusively from that unmerited mercy of 
 God, which chooses things which are not, as 
 though they were. But look at them in reference 
 to their employment, and that principle of respon- 
 sibility must not be left out of account, which, 
 though unable of itself to do good, must yet as- 
 sent to the good which is done for it. " Tolle 
 liberum arbitrium, et non erit, quod salvetur ; 
 tolle gratiam, et non erit, uncle salvetur. " Leave 
 out either, and the existence of man would be a 
 riddle, and he would no longer have a consistent 
 place in the Universe of God. 
 
 Now, what treatment did this systen of doctrine 
 meet with, when it was re-cast by the powerful 
 intellect of the Genevese Reformer ? He at once 
 assailed the existence of responsibility by assert- 
 ing that the immediate object of the Divine De- 
 crees was the ultimate decision in man, and not 
 the reconstruction of his nature. Thus did he 
 profess to vindicate the supremacy of the Creator, 
 while in reality he exonerated the creature from 
 obedience. For duty cannot exist, when respon- 
 sibility is extinguished. And this is the necessary 
 result when the employment as well as the gift of 
 grace is supposed to be the subject of a decree 
 which is wholly irrespective of the conduct of the 
 creature. So that the result of transferring the 
 decrees of God from the scheme of Mediation at 
 large to the conduct of individuals, was in reality, 
 to leave men as free from accountableness as the 
 beasts. Now it .is an obvious objection to this 
 15 
 
170 
 
 system, that it is inconsistent with the constitu- 
 tion of the world which we inhabit. The doctrines 
 of Necessity as Bishop Butler has shown conclu- 
 sively, cannot be reduced to practice. They are 
 incompatible with the conduct which men's wants 
 compel, and their conscience witnesses. They are 
 fatal to the existence of praise and blame, to the 
 justice of reward and punishment. When Calvin 
 kindled the flames which consumed Servetus he 
 gave a proof of the reality of his belief in those 
 principles, which his famous third book of Insti- 
 tutes cannot do away. But how was it, then, 
 that a man of Calvin's great penetration should 
 have been betrayed into those excesses, which 
 earned for him from the milder Melancthon the title 
 of the Zeno of modern times? It could not have 
 been merely the boldness of his intellect, or the 
 harshness of his temper, which induced him to 
 found his system on the principles of Fatalism. 
 The "horrible decretum" must have had some 
 peculiar charm for him. And such, no doubt, i1 
 had in that singular aid which it gave to his the- 
 ological scheme, whereby it enabled him to di : 
 pense with the whole theory of that Church systeit, 
 which in practice he had set himself to overthrow. 
 Let it be allowed that God's Decrees had relation 
 solely to the decisions of His separate creatures, 
 that these decisions were forced upon individuals 
 by some external law, independently of their own 
 participation, and the whole plan of ordinances, 
 which had been provided in the Church — the 
 means of Sacramental union with Christ, of in- 
 herence in His Sacred Body — might at once be 
 dispensed with And now it may be seen what 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 171 
 
 Calvin gained by substituting the actions of indi- 
 viduals, as the object of the Divine Decrees, in 
 place of the Mediation of Christ. His grand ob- 
 ject, in which he led the way among the Reform- 
 ers, was the destruction of the whole ecclesiastical 
 system of the Church. Now, that which renderec. 
 the Church system so precious, which indisposed 
 devout men to touch it, even when its luxuriance 
 might with advantage be pruned away, was that 
 it was the appointed means of bestowing those 
 hallowed gifts which included men among the 
 number of the elect, and gained for those who 
 duly used them the predestined blessings of salva- 
 tion. To get rid, therefore, of the treasure which 
 was enshrined in the Church's ordinances was to 
 render the ordinances themselves contemptible. 
 And thus did Calvin take the true course for 
 weakening men's value for the offices of the 
 Church, when he persuaded them that the pro- 
 mises of Scripture did not refer to the privileges 
 of grace, but to an arbitrary pre-appointment to 
 glory. 
 
 But with this gain there was a corresponding 
 loss. For since the Divine Decrees were in rea- 
 lity a reflexion cast beforehand by the facts of 
 Mediation, it was impossible to destroy their true 
 character, without obscuring men's perception of 
 that great doctrine with which they were con- 
 nected. And consequently the system of Calvin 
 has a direct tendency to conceal from men a large 
 part of the scheme of Mediation. For since God's 
 Decrees were no longer looked upon as the law, 
 by which He dealt with those who were members 
 cf His Son's Body, but were an independent, an- 
 
172 
 
 tecedent Decree of the Great Creator, they plainly 
 led men to look away from the system of grace to 
 the system of nature. And herein does Calvinism 
 touch on that very error of Pelagianism, to which 
 "t professes to be most opposed. As the system 
 of Arminius, if, indeed, it supposes man's election 
 to grace to be dependent on foreseen actions, as- 
 signs too much to the desert of men, so the sys- 
 tem of Calvin, by resting the individual actions of 
 men on the Decree of the Creator, irrespective of 
 that real re-construction of their nature which is 
 wrought in Christ, does not rest man's safety suf- 
 ficiently on the work of Mediation. It is true that 
 Calvin professes to ground God's Decrees on the 
 merits of Christ, and on the sacrifice which was 
 offered upon the Cross. But what is here com- 
 plained of is, that though he allows what Christ 
 does on man's behalf towards God, yet that His 
 system blinds him to what Christ does on God's 
 behalf towards His brethren. For he supposes 
 man's salvation to be spoken of in Scripture, as 
 though it were the result of a Decree which acts 
 immmediately upon man, irrespective of that 
 series of acts whereby the Humanity of Christ in- 
 fuses itself as a supernatural seed through man's 
 nature. So that Our Lord's sufferings for man 
 are looked upon as a mere arbitrary act ; and are 
 not grounded upon that relation to mankind, which 
 grows out of His character as the Second Adam. 
 And this want of coherence and completeness in 
 his system has opened a door to Socinianism, from 
 which, as we know by history, even the strong in- 
 tellect of Calvin has been unable to guard his 
 disciples. 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 173 
 
 The foregoing statements afford a ready crite- 
 rion, by which we may discriminate the system of 
 Calvin from that of the Church. Not that we 
 should find in him, much less in his followers, 
 such rigid adherence to his intellectual theory, as 
 absolutely to exclude all expressions drawn from 
 the Church's ordinary teachings ; but the lan- 
 guage of his theory, looked at in itself, is precise 
 and distinctive. It is admitted on all hands that 
 the gifts of God are but the acting out of that sys- 
 tem, which is revealed in the scriptural statement 
 of His counsels. Now, if the Decrees of God are 
 not associated, as the Church supposes, with the 
 system of Our Lord's Mediation — if their imrae- 
 ate object be not the reception and employment 
 of the gifts of grace, but the actions of individuals, 
 it is plain, that no acceptance can be given to 
 that Sacramental system, which supposes divine 
 influences to be communicated through union 
 with Our Lord's Body. God's gifts will be looked 
 at as an immediate and independent donation 
 conferred by the Creator on His creatures, irre- 
 spective of that medium of communication which 
 hns been provided in the Humanity of Christ. 
 Whatever advantages may have been obtained 
 through those acts which were performed by Our 
 Lord in the days of His flesh, no further need 
 will now exist for the " One Mediator between 
 God and men, the Man Christ Jesus." The Su- 
 preme Governor may of course bestow spiritual 
 gifts, simultaneously with the exhibition of Sacra- 
 ments ; but no peculiar connexion can be sup- 
 posed to tie the two together. For their con- 
 nexion depends wholly upon this principle — tha* 
 . 15* 
 
174 
 
 the channel through which heavenly blessings 
 flow forth is the Humanity of Christ. Abstract 
 this circumstance, which depends upon a super- 
 natural series of relations, and the peculiar efficacy 
 of Sacraments must be rested only upon the natu- 
 ral fitness of external emblems to convince the 
 intellect and affect the heart. Here, then, is the 
 first characteristic of the Calvinistic theory : its 
 rejection of that Sacramental system, by which 
 the blessings of Mediation are distributed through 
 the Body of Christ. Its second is the denial of 
 any gift of grace, except to those who shall finally 
 be saved. This is the necessary consequence of 
 the view which it takes of the doctrine of Decrees. 
 For God's purposes cannot be defeated: the 
 Word which cometh out of His mouth cannot re- 
 turn in vain. Now, if His Decrees do not refer, 
 as the Church supposes, to the re-creation of our 
 common nature in Christ, but are a mode of su- 
 perseding the springs of individual resolution, 
 they would be frustrated, supposing it were neces- 
 sary to take any account of the principle of hu- 
 man responsibility. For their object is the ulti- 
 mate decision of man, and not that reconstruction of 
 his nature, which assumes that his accountableness 
 remains undiminished. God's grace is not sup- 
 posed to be given, that the members of Christ 
 may serve Him according to that new law of 
 liberty, which has superseded their old relation to 
 the corrupt Adam; but in consequence of an ar- 
 bitrary decree, which marks out some of the 
 children of men for death, and others for salva- 
 tion. So that a belief that any gifts of grace are 
 bestowed where there is no certainty of salvation, 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 175 
 
 is inconsistent with the fundamental principles of 
 the theory of Calvin. 
 
 And here it may be asked whether the author 
 of such a system had any right to claim the sanc- 
 tion of that greatest mind in the ancient Church 
 — so rich, profound, and affectionate — whose 
 works, next to the sacred writings, have been the 
 favourite study of all following generations. For 
 while Calvin mentions, with evident satisfaction, 
 that the majority of ancient writers had been 
 wholly unacquainted with that theory, which the 
 force of his intellect had enabled him to discover, 
 he yet refers to St. Augustin, as one who was 
 universally admitted to take the same view as 
 himself of the Decrees of God. I will not claim 
 for the Bishop of Hippo an exemption from error, 
 to which himself made no pretensions. The 
 season of distress and perplexity, in which he 
 lived, when the ancient forms of social life were 
 falling to pieces under the rude shock of the 
 Northern Barbarians, tended especially to fix his 
 thoughts on that order and stability which can be 
 found only in the purposes of God. What wonder, 
 as he heard on his dying bed of the excesses to 
 which his own city was just about to be a victim, 
 if his last works should show that be was medi- 
 tating, like our own Hooker, on the order and har- 
 mony of the heavenly world, and that he found rest 
 in the contemplation of those unfailing Decrees, 
 which have been the comfort of so many good 
 men amidst the perplexities and reverses of 
 Christ's earthly kingdom. It was natural, per- 
 haps, that he should attach to them a dispropor- 
 tionate importance, when amidst those wild out 
 
176 
 
 cries with which the Vandals had filled northern 
 Africa, he beheld them, 
 
 " Calm as the march of some majestic cloud, 
 Which o'er wild scenes of ocean-war, 
 Holds its still course in Heaven afar." 
 
 But even admitting that St. Ausmstin was 
 betrayed occasionally into incautious expressions, 
 as Jeremy Taylor and others have imagined, yet 
 the principles which have been adduced, amply 
 vindicate him from the charge of coinciding with 
 Calvin. For he distinctly asserts that spiritual 
 gifts are bestowed even upon those who are not 
 finally penitent, and he maintains in the fullest 
 manner that doctrine of Sacramental grace, which 
 the theory of Calvin was intended to discard. It 
 has already been shown that the Regeneration of 
 infants is a decisive test, by which to ascertain 
 men's belief in the doctrine of Our Lord's Media- 
 tion. Since in this case the human receiver can 
 contribute nothing, its whole efficacy must of ne- 
 cessity be thrown upon the action of its Divine 
 Giver. So that it enables us to ascertain whether 
 men suppose any thing to be really effected by 
 those spiritual gifts, which have their channel in 
 Our Lord's Humanity. Now on this point St. 
 Austin speaks so distinctly, that Mr. Goode him- 
 self is compelled to admit him to receive the 
 doctrine. What can be more decisive than such 
 passages as the following ? " We say that the 
 Holy Spirit dwells in baptized infants, although 
 they know it not. For they are ignorant of it, 
 although it is in them, as they are ignorant of 
 their own mind. For it lies in them, as yet 
 
OF DIVINE DECREES. 177 
 
 unable to be used, like some buried spark, io be 
 quickened by increasing years."'- 7 Or again, 
 "It is matter of the utmost wonder, that to some 
 of His sons, -whom He has regenerated in Christ, 
 to whom He has given faith, hope, and charity, 
 God does not give perseverance." 23 We need 
 not be surprised, therefore, at finding that he 
 speaks of the blessing of Election- 9 as conferred 
 through the ministration of Baptism. And his 
 example illustrates the rule, by which it may be 
 decided whether those who profess agreement 
 with Calvin, are really able to accord with the 
 English Church. For it is indifferent whether 
 the charge which has been brought against St. 
 Augustin be well-grounded or no, seeing that his 
 error, if it existed, was only one of philosophy, 
 and did not affect. his religious faith. For by 
 affirming the reality of Baptismal grace, he main- 
 tained the great truth of Our Lord's Mediation. 
 And this is a test of universal applicability. 30 Are 
 
 27 "Dicimus ergo in baptizatis parvulis, quamvis id neseiant, 
 habitare Spiritum Sanctum. Sic enim eum nescient, quamvis 
 sit in eis, quamadmodum nesciunt et mentem suam; cujus in 
 eis ratio, qua uti nondum possunt, velut quaedam scintilla sopita 
 est, excitanda aetatis accessu." — Epist. clxxxvii. 8. 
 
 2S De Corrept. et Grat. sec. viii. 
 
 23 Op. Imperf. c. Jul. i. 38, 39. 
 
 30 '• The ancient predestinarians never questioned the cer- 
 tainty of Regeneration in Baptism, hecause this doctrine was 
 consistent with their theory. For though they maintained that 
 only the elect or predestinate are endued with the gift of per- 
 severance to the end, and will be finally saved, yet they be- 
 lieved that God bestows at His pleasure every other kind and 
 measure of grace on those persons, from whom He withholds 
 this special grace of perseverance. They therefore held, in com- 
 mon with the rest of the Church, that the forgiveness of sin, and 
 
178 
 
 there any, whose minds dwell exclusively on the 
 beauty and harmony of the Divine Decrees, 
 whose habit is to refer every thing to God's pur- 
 pose, but whose language does not do justice to 
 the importance of human responsibility ? — still if 
 the error be only one of philosophy, if it does not 
 lead them to detract from the reality of the Me- 
 diation of Christ, if they admit that Sacramental 
 system through which the Incarnate Son has 
 made His Humanity the channel of heavenly 
 gifts, they may be bad reasoners, but sound 
 Christians. But if their theory induces them to 
 deny the reality of those gifts, which are be- 
 stowed through Sacraments on the members of 
 Christ — if they will not recognize the blessings 
 of that renewed nature, whereby the Second 
 Adam restores what was corrupted by the. first 
 (of all wmich the Regeneration of Infants has been 
 shown to be the test) — how can they hold the 
 great truth of Our Lord's Mediation, or believe 
 those assertions of the Prayer-Book, to which 
 they are required to assent ? 
 
 the gift of the Holy Ghost, are generally bestowed in Baptism," 
 &c. " This was Augustin's Doctrine," &c. — Bishop Bethellon 
 Regeneration* cap. ix. p. 140. 
 
THE CHURCH'S SERVICE, ETC. 179 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE FORMULARIES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 
 WERE NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 
 
 It has been shown in the preceding Chapter 
 that the Primitive Doctrine of absolute Decrees is 
 not at variance with the truth of Baptismal Re- 
 generation : it remains to show in the concluding 
 Chapters, first, that those who drew up the 
 Church's Formularies, had not adopted that pe- 
 culiar theory on the subject of Decrees, which 
 goes by the name of Calvinism ; and, secondly, 
 that such Calvinism as was once prevalent in the 
 English Church, is no justification for those par- 
 ties in the present day, by whom the obvious 
 sense of the Church's words is rejected. Now, 
 in handling this subject, it is not necessary to 
 consider the Church's words at large, but only 
 that part of her offices, in which the doctrine of 
 Baptism is delivered. The Seventeenth Article, 
 therefore, shall be left untouched for several 
 reasons. First — It will be manifest to those who 
 will compare it with the slight sketch of the 
 Church's doctrine respecting the Divine Decrees, 
 which hast just been given, that it asserts no 
 more than has universally been believed on this 
 subject. The ground on which it has been often 
 supposed to have a contrary tendency is, that it 
 does not guard and limit its statements respecting 
 the Decrees of God by a co-incident assertion of 
 
180 
 
 human responsibility. But then such statements 
 occur in other portions of the Church's teaching ; 
 and it is exactly conformable to the example of 
 Scripture to put forth God's Decrees in their 
 simplicity, while the consistency of doctrine is 
 maintained by other statements, in which the 
 accountableness of man is not less explicitly vin- 
 dicated. 
 
 Again — Dr. Laurence 1 has shown beyond dis- 
 pute, that historical evidence plainly identities the 
 teaching of the Articles with the school of Melanc- 
 thon, rather than with that of Calvin. Melancthon 
 was the person principally consulted by Cranmer 3 
 at the time of their composition ; the language it- 
 self is in great measure borrowed from Melanc- 
 thon's words ; and it was not till a. d. 1552 3 (a 
 year after the original compilation of the Articles,) 4 
 that the peculiar theory of Calvin became a matter 
 of public controversy. The Lutherans, indeed, had 
 used language at an earlier period, which may be 
 confounded with that of Calvin ; but a charac- 
 teristic difference had separated the two parties : 
 the language of the Lutherans was founded mainly 
 upon a philosophical misconception of the difficulty 
 of reconciling foreknowledge with free-agency — 
 while the scriptural statement of God's Decrees re- 
 specting the re-creation of mankind in Christ, was 
 maintained by Calvin to be a sentence passed arbi- 
 trarily upon individuals. And when our Articles 
 were composed, the Lutherans, as their own con- 
 
 1 Bampton Lecture, viii. and note 3, p. 167 and 431. 
 
 2 Bampt. Lect. p. 229 and 232. Notes 6 and 7 in Serm. ii. 
 
 3 Laurence's Bampt. Lect. Note 18 in Serm. ii. p. 246 
 Stripe's Cranmer, B. ii. cap. xxvii. 
 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 181 
 
 fessions 5 prove, were heartily ashamed of the Stoical 
 tendency of their early statements. 
 
 Thirdly — It is comparatively immaterial what are 
 men's views respecting the Seventeenth Article, 
 provided they are not led into a practical disbelief 
 of the actions of the Mediator, as brought out in 
 the Sacramental Services of the Church. It has 
 never been disputed that the doctrine of grace in- 
 volves a deep mystery, to which the faculties of 
 man are unable to do justice. Its mystery lies in 
 the fact, that all the good of human actions must be 
 assigned to <c the Father of Lights," in whom lies 
 the ultimate fountain of illumination, and yet that 
 the agency of man is to be so far admitted, that the 
 evil of his doings may be chargeable on his own 
 responsibility. This object the Church 6 has effect- 
 ed, not by such a minute analysis of motives as 
 
 5 Vide Laurence's Bampton Lectures, Serm. ii. note 21 : 
 "Nimis horridse fuerunt initio Stoics disputationes apud nostros 
 de fato, et discipline nocuerunt." — Melanct. Epist. Lib. iii. Ep. 
 42. This Epistle is addressed to Cranmer, Comp. Lib. iv. Ep. 
 796, where he calls Calvin u Zeno." 
 
 6 If the reader asks for a specimen of the ingenious theories 
 on this subject, which have been suggested by individuals, he 
 may take the following statement of the views of St. Thomas 
 Aquinas from Montagne (Turnellius) De Gratia ; Diss. xi. De 
 Jansenio: " Observant Thomisue. Primo — Deum esse primam 
 causam efficientem, hominem vero primam causam deficientem. 
 Secundo — In omni opere, sive bono, sive malo, aliquid ex parte 
 Dei, et aliquid ex parte hominis rcperiri : scilicet in opere bono, 
 ex parte Dei reperitur gratia ; ex parte hominis consensus gra- 
 tia; ; in opere malo, ex parte Dei voluntas denegandae gratiae 
 prsemoventis ; ex parte hominis, mala peccandi voluntas, ipsum- 
 que actuale peccatum. Tertio — Id omne quod in opere bono ex 
 parte Dei reperitur, prius esse et causam ejus, quod ex parte 
 hominis adcst in eodem opere ; e contra in opere malo, quod ex 
 parte hominis adest, e<? prius esse et causam ejus, quod ex parte 
 Dei contingit." 
 
 16 
 
182 THE 
 
 would adjudicate the different portions of every 
 action to its proper parentage, but by putting side 
 by side, in their fulness, the two doctrines of God's 
 power and man's accountableness. For though our 
 faculties are not adequate to lay down the exact 
 laws under which the two principles concur, there 
 is no contradiction in their joint statement. To 
 assert that the means of salvation are only through 
 grace, and that grace is only given arbitrarily to a 
 selected few, is to say that the means of salvation 
 are not given to the residue of men — it is to assert, 
 therefore, the Calvinistic doctrine of Reprobation. 
 And to affirm the first statement, but deny the 
 second, would be a contradiction in terms: it would 
 be to affirm a thing to be true, at the same time that 
 we denied it. And therefore to assert the Calvin- 
 istic doctrine of Election, and profess to reject the 
 doctrine of Reprobation, has been stated by Calvin 
 himself to be childish and irrational [ u minis inscite 
 et pueriliter."] But there is no such contradiction, 
 in admitting that we are unable to discern by what 
 laws two co-ordinate principles coalesce in the pro- 
 duction of a certain set of actions. This is only a 
 confession of human ignorance. And such has 
 always been the Church's manner of treating the 
 question. The statements of its doctrine on grace, 
 which were collected by Celestine, conclude with 
 the following declaration : " On the more profound 
 and difficult questions, into which this subject runs, 
 which those who opposed the heretics have treated 
 at large, while we do not dare to despise them, we 
 think it unnecessary to dogmatize." 7 
 
 7 Harduin, vol. i. p. 1258. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 18 
 
 In discussing, then, the Calvinism imputed to 
 the Reformers, it is not necessary, in this place, to 
 enter into those more abstract questions, which 
 might be raised respecting the Articles : the practi- 
 cal language of the Service is sufficient for our pur- 
 pose. For the present subject does not lead us into 
 a philosophical inquiry into the nature of things, 
 but connects itself with the direct assurances of 
 Holy Scripture. And however highly men estimate 
 the doctrinal authority of the Articles, yet the 
 statements of the Service-Book cannot be super- 
 seded. For not only do all the beneficed clergy 
 affirm their assent and consent to it (which they 
 could not do without believing its assertions to be 
 correct,) but they use it on the most solemn occa- 
 sions, and in the immediate presence of God. And 
 the Laity also are compelled to give it a silent as- 
 sent, because the affecting ordinances, which touch 
 most nearly on family life, cannot be ministered 
 without its employment. So that unless the 
 assertions of the Prayer-Book were true, they could 
 not in any wise be tolerated. But then Mr. Goode 
 and others affirm, that though the language of the 
 Service-Book is not what they like (which is a vir- 
 tual admission that prima facie it makes against 
 them,) yet that it is not so express, but that taking 
 into account what its authors must have meant, 
 they can honestly subscribe it. " My own view," 
 says Mr. Goode, " would, even in theory, apart 
 from the experience of the results, be adverse to the 
 use of such lauguage ; while, knowing the meaning 
 intended to be affixed to it by those who applied it 
 in our Formularies, I have not the smallest difficulty 
 in accepting it. Now, it is not to be denied that 
 
184 
 
 this principle may fairly be applied in various cases. 
 When language is dubious, the intention with 
 which it is was uttered enables us to affix a definite 
 meaning to that, which might otherwise be uncer- 
 tain. But then the language employed must really 
 be dubious, for if distinct assertions are in this 
 manner to be explained away, of what use is lan- 
 guage as the vehicle of thought ? And, therefore, 
 to introduce this principle as an argument against 
 Baptismal Regeneration, would only issue, were 
 the attempt successful, in the conclusion that the 
 Reformers were dishonest men. But how far is 
 Mr. Goode's assertion, respecting the opinions of 
 the Reformers, w T ell-founded ? The point which he 
 has to prove, is, that Calvin istic sentiments were 
 entertained by those parties, by whom our different 
 services for Baptism were drawn up. Thus he 
 will obtain a principle for interpreting any ambigu- 
 ous expressions. Who, then, were their compilers ? 
 This inquiry involves the consideration of that 
 which passed at three several eras — the first com- 
 pilation of the Prayer-Book, a. d. 1548-9, the ad- 
 dition of the last part of the Catechism, a. d. 1604, 
 the passing of the last Act of Uniformity, a. d. 
 1662. It must be considered by whom the Church's 
 Services w T ere composed at these different periods, 
 and what is known of the private opinions of those 
 who compiled them. 
 
 The first period, a. d. 1548, is the most mate- 
 rial, because the larger part of our present Offices 
 of Baptism was then first put together. And the 
 work which was then done was so avowedly re- 
 ferred to Cranmer (the only person whose name 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 185 
 
 was inserted in the Act passed upon the occasion,) 
 that it will not be needful to go further in any inquiry 
 into the sentiments of its authors. This First Book 
 of King Edward underwent great alteration indeed, 
 a. d. 1552, but as the changes then made consisted 
 of the excision of various important rites, while 
 that which remained received no material accession, 
 the changes then made throw no light upon the in- 
 tention of those original expressions which are left 
 to us. And the same may be said respecting the 
 ratification of the services on the accesssion of 
 Elizabeth, a. d. 1559, by which the meaning to be 
 attached to the expressions which were left un- 
 touched was wholly unaltered. For so far as this 
 meaning is to be elicited from the natural force of 
 the words, or from the intention of those who com- 
 piled them, their subsequent adoption at that pe- 
 riod is immaterial. 
 
 It may be maintained, indeed, that we are not 
 to look merely to the force of the words themselves, 
 but to the general design of those from whom they 
 receive legal validity. But this principle would be 
 far from placing Mr. Goode in a more favourable 
 position, for it would bring him down from the 1st 
 Elizabeth, to the 14th Charles II. For since a 
 subsequent Act of the Legislature supersedes those 
 Acts which precede it, our present Act of Unifor- 
 mity dates from a. d. 1662, and the parties to whose 
 intention it would refer us, are the Convocation 
 and Parliament which then assembled. And the 
 intention of these parties is too well known to ren- 
 der it possible to suppose them favourable to Cal- 
 
 8 Strype's Eccles. Mem. vol. ii. part i. p. 134. 
 
 16* 
 
186 THE 
 
 vinism. So that Mr. Goode is concluded from go- 
 ing further than a. d. 1549, when the Prayer-Book 
 was first published, by his unwillingness to go on 
 to a. d. 1662, when it received that legal sanction, 
 which at present accompanies it. To this, then, 
 we come at present ; and something shall after- 
 wards be said respecting the additions to the Cate- 
 chism after the Hampton Conference, a. d. 1604, 
 and respecting the additions to the Baptismal 
 Offices, a. d. 1662. 
 
 Now, in entering upon the consideration of 
 Cranmer's opinions, it is necessary to follow Mr. 
 Goode into the somewhat novel ground to which 
 he has transferred the controversy. He opens his 
 historical statements with the startling assertion, that 
 Peter Lombard is on his side, and that in the 
 blooming period of the Scholastic Philosophy, it 
 was an open question whether " grace was always 
 conferred upon infants in Baptism." The state- 
 ment is surprising, considering the expressions 
 which occur in those public services which were 
 at that time employed by the Church, and consid- 
 ering the words of the Fathers, whom the School- 
 men w r ere accustomed to acknowledge as para- 
 mount authorities. Mr. Goode rests his claim to 
 Peter Lombard's sanction upon a passage quoted 
 in part by Dr. Pusey, 9 in which inquiry is made, 
 " whether to children in Baptism is given grace, by 
 which they may profit in riper years." " The 
 Master of the Sentences, no doubt, holds," says 
 Mr. Goode, " that all the infants of Christians re- 
 ceive in Baptism remission of their sins." But he 
 
 9 " Scriptural views of Baptism," p. 150. First Edition. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 187 
 
 does not think, Mr. Goode implies, that " those gifts 
 of grace that give spiritual life to the soul" . . . 
 . . " were conferred at all upon infants." " And the 
 doctrine that grace was always conferred upon in- 
 fants in Baptism, did not become a ruled doctrine 
 in the Church of Rome till the Council of Vienna, 
 in 1311, and was then only laid down as ihe more 
 probable opinion. For in a letter of Pope Inno- 
 cent IV., in 1250, afterwards inserted in the Canon 
 Law, it is distinctly recognized as an open ques- 
 tion, whether grace is, or is not, conferred upon in- 
 fants in Baptism." 
 
 To point out the groundlessness of these state- 
 ments, is not a mere question of antiquarian research 
 The assertions before us are a necessary step in 
 Mr. Goode's argument, and their removal will be 
 seen in the sequel to be fatal to those conclusions, 
 of which Cranmer, and through him the English 
 Church, are the subjects. And rilfct, what is to be 
 said respecting Peter Lombard ? Did he deny, or 
 even doubt, that grace was bestowed on infants in 
 Baptism ? Far from it : had Mr. Goode taken the 
 trouble to look somew 7 hat further in Lombard's 
 pages, he w y ould have seen this truth distinctly 
 stated ; and thus he might have been led to perceive 
 that the passage w T hich he has himself quoted, and 
 which asserts that the grace given in infancy is not 
 sufficient for the adult, but requires augmentation in 
 riper years, is rather hostile to his own view than 
 favourable to it. For Peter Lombard's words come, 
 at the most, to no more than those of Hooker : " Bap- 
 tism doth challenge to itself but the inchoation of 
 those graces, the consummation whereof dependeth 
 on mysteries ensuing." The following is Mr. 
 
188 
 
 Goode's own translation : " Respecting infants, who 
 have not arrived at the use of their reason, there is 
 a question, whether in Baptism they have received 
 grace by which, when they come to riper years, 
 they may be able to will and work what is good. 
 It appears that they have not received it ; inasmuch 
 as that grace is love and faith, which prepares and 
 aids the will. And who will say that they have re- 
 ceived faith and love ? But if they have not re- 
 ceived grace, by which they may be able to do 
 good works when they have grown up, therefore the 
 grace given in Baptism is not sufficient for them in 
 this state (i. e. as adults,) nor can they now T be good 
 through it, but need the addition of other grace." 
 Mr. Goode does not add, in his translation, the suc- 
 ceeding words, which, however, are very material 
 to the argument: " And if this grace is not added, 
 it is not their fault, because they have been justified 
 from sin ?" 10 I^w these words might suggest the 
 real meaning of the ambiguous expression, " the 
 grace given in Baptism is not sufficient." Does 
 this assertion mean, as Mr. Goode supposes, that 
 Baptism does not confer " those gifts of grace that 
 give spiritual life to the soul ?" Or does it mean 
 merely that though the life of the soul begins in 
 Baptism, yet that an augmentation of grace is needed 
 in riper years ? The least acquaintance with Peter 
 Lombard's system, will show that it means the 
 second. 
 
 Ii is impossible to establish this statement by re- 
 ference to other passages, without a passing notice 
 of the relation which the Master of the Sentences 
 bore to his predecessors. When he left his native 
 
 10 Peter Lombard, Lib. iv. Dis. iv. H. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 189 
 
 Lombardy to study at Paris, he found that the sys- 
 tem of pure reasoning, which Abelard had carried 
 to the extreme of skepticism, was likely to be alto- 
 gether fatal to authority. His aim, therefore, when 
 he rose into eminence, was to give shape and fixed- 
 ness to the voice of the Church, by collecting its 
 scattered dicta into a consistent body. The Book 
 of Sentences, therefore, was little more than the 
 opinions of the Fathers, collected into a methodized 
 whole, and especially of those four Latin Doctors, 
 St. Hilary, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, and St. Aus- 
 tin, by whom the final judgment of the Western 
 Church had been expressed. It was not to be ex- 
 pected that such an author could directly oppose 
 any synodical decree, which the Church had put 
 forth as the basis of its teaching. It would have 
 been strange indeed if he had been unmindful of 
 that decree of the Council of Orange, which con- 
 cluded the contentions respecting grace, by which 
 the ancient Church had so long been agitated. 
 " This, too, we consider to be accordant to the 
 Catholic Faith, that all the baptized, having received 
 grace through Baptism, can fulfil, if they will labour 
 faithfully, and ought, by Christ's help and co-opera- 
 tion, to fulfil whatever is needed for the salvation 
 of their souls." 11 Now here are the very conditions 
 which Mr. Goode sets down as essential, in his judg- 
 ment, to the assertion of Baptismal regeneration ; 
 the statement, namely — first, that grace is bestowed 
 on all who are baptized ; and, secondly, that the 
 gift bestowed on the baptized " does not apply to 
 them merely as infants, but extends to their condi- 
 tion as adults." For here it is all who are baptized, 
 
 11 Harduin, ii. 1001. 
 
190 the church's service 
 
 and the gift bestowed is spoken of as contributing to 
 future obedience. 
 
 Such, then, was the position in which this doc- 
 trine had been left by those Fathers whom Lom- 
 bard epitomized. Neither had the succession of 
 doctrine been since interrupted. For in the ninth 
 century the same two criteria re-appear in the state- 
 ments of the Council of Valence, 12 which makes 
 especial reference to the previous Synod of Orange, 
 as having fixed the consent of doctrine on this 
 momentous subject. This Council was called on 
 occasion of those disputes on Predestination, 
 which had been revived in Dauphiny ; and it 
 affirms, first, the regeneration of all baptized per- 
 sons ; and, secondly, the necessity of their con- 
 tinuance in grace given. And thus are we carried 
 on to the divines of the twelfth century, of whom 
 it will be enough to mention two, as showing 
 what was the mode of thought which Peter Lom- 
 bard inherited. For he owed his first introduc- 
 tion to the University of Paris to the patronage of 
 St. Bernard, who thus forms the link between the 
 Fathers and the Schoolmen. And St. Bernard 
 recommended him to the care of Gildin, Abbot 
 of St. Victor, whose society was just then adorned 
 by the celebrated Hugh of St. Victor. Now 
 what were their sentiments on Baptism ? Two 
 
 12 "Quod omnis multitudo fidelium ex aqua et Spiritu sanc.to 
 regencrata,ac per hoc veraciter ecclcs'ue incorporata, et in morte 
 Christi baptizata, in ejus sanguine sit a peccatis suis abluta. . . . 
 Alios salvari selerna salute, quia per gratiam Dei in redemptione 
 sua fidoliter permanent, . . . alios, quia noluerunt permancre in 
 salute fidci, quain initio accepcrunt, redemptioniaque gratiam 
 potius irritam facere quam servare elegorunt. ad perceptionein 
 aeternae beatitudinis nullo modo pervenire." — llarduin, v. p. 1)1. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 191 
 
 passages are subjoined from the second, showing 
 that he maintained every infant to receive the 
 gift which it bestows; and also that the gift 
 communicated is spiritual grace. 13 The words of 
 St. Bernard are still more to the point, because 
 they indicate what it was w T hich Lombard de- 
 signed by that forgiveness of original sin, which 
 Mr. Goode allows him to have attributed to Bap- 
 tism. He did not conceive that the removal of 
 man's guilt was effected by any technical altera- 
 tion in his external circumstances, but by such 
 inward purification, as the Holy Ghost only can 
 effect. It was this real change, w r hich the blood 
 of the Son of God had purchased for the faithful. 
 u What, therefore, is that grace, whereof we have 
 investiture by Baptism ? It is the purification, 
 surely, of our sins. For who can m^kehini clean, 
 who is conceived of unclean seed, save He, who 
 only is clean, to whom sin belongs not, God ?" 
 "We are washed, therefore, in Baptism, because 
 the hand-writing of our condemnation is done 
 away, and this grace is given to us, that hence- 
 forth concupiscence should harm us not, if only 
 we abstain from giving consent to it." 14 
 
 These statements lead us on to the doctrine of 
 
 13 " Sacramontum et rem sacramenti suscipiunt parvuli ubi- 
 cunque eta quibuscunque baptizantur in nomine S. Trinitatis." — 
 Hugo de. S. Victore. Summa Senfentiarutn, vol. i. 400. 
 
 " Per verburn elementum canctificatur, ut virtutem sacramenti 
 accipiat. Ut quemadmodum elementum ex naturali quadam 
 qualitate repracsentat, ex superaddita institutions significat: sic 
 ex sanctificatione contineat (quae sanctificandis per earn imper- 
 tienda est) gratiam spiritualem." — De Sticramcntis, Lib. ii. p. 6, 
 sec. ii. vol. iii. 620. 
 
 14 Sermo in Caena Domini, 2, 3, vol. i. p. 897. Paris, 1719. 
 
192 the church's service 
 
 Peter Lombard, which differed in one very essen- 
 tial point from that 'of the later Schoolmen. For 
 whereas they separated those gifts, which grace 
 bestows upon men, from their Divine Giver ; 
 speaking of them as habits infused into the mind, 
 which, when bestowed, may, by some perhaps be 
 supposed to be our own ; he, on the contrary, 
 keeping nearer to the statements of antiquity, 
 identified the " love of God which is shed abroad 
 in our hearts," with the spirit which sheds it. 
 By this means he avoids a question which is some- 
 times raised respecting the words of the Apostles, 
 whether by love they mean that principle of which 
 GoeHs the source, or that of which He is the ob- 
 ject. For according to him these things differ 
 from one another, only as the fountain differs from 
 the stream. 15 " It has been stated that the Holy 
 Ghost is that love of the Father and of the Son, 
 whereby they love us, and whereby they are 
 loved mutually by one another. Further, this 
 Holy Ghost is that love or Charity, whereby we 
 love God and our neighbour ; and when this 
 charity so prevails in us, as to make us love God 
 and our neighbour, then the Holy Ghost is said 
 to be given to us." 16 This is virtually the same 
 statement for which Petavius produces abundant 
 authorities from the writings of the Fathers. 
 " That which even in this life gilds us with the 
 glory of sons I mean the Holy Ghost, because it 
 
 15 " Misit autem nobis de coelo Paracletum, per quern et in 
 quo nobiscum est, et in nobis babitat, non alienum nobis infun- 
 dens, sed substantia sua3 et Patris proprium Spirituni." — & Cy- 
 ril de Sancta Trin, Dial. vii. vol. v. p. 642. 
 
 16 Lib. Sent. i. 17, B. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 193 
 
 belongs to the Son, will produce the adoption of 
 sons even in others : in Him its work is not 
 wrought, because not coming to Him from with- 
 out, but being substantially one with Him ; and 
 through Him it flows forth to those who are wor- 
 thy to receive Him, by the good pleasure of the 
 Father." 17 Or again take the following passage : 
 a Our Lord says, ' He that is least in the Kingdom 
 of God, is greater than John the Baptist.' The 
 words can refer only in one way to the person 
 who is newly baptized, and whose own con- 
 duct can as yet give him no claim to prominence ; 
 namely that the Blessed Baptist was born of wo- 
 man, but he has been born of God, and has be- 
 come partaker of the Divine nature, having the 
 Holy Ghost dwelling in him, and being now the 
 temple of God." 13 Now it is plain that those who 
 entertained this view of things could not make 
 that separation, which Mr. Goode attributes to 
 Lombard, between the forgiveness of sins, and 
 the gift of grace. For the first must be supposed 
 to come through that participation in the Divine 
 nature which is communicated through the second. 
 And this, Lombard tells us in express words, is 
 to refer the forgiveness of original sin in Baptism 
 to that gift of grace, from which Mr. Goode al- 
 leges that he meant to discriminate it. " There 
 are two ways in which original sin is said to be 
 remitted in Baptism ; by the grace of Baptism 
 concupiscence is weakened, so as not to reign, 
 unless man gives it strength by consenting to it ; 
 
 17 S. Cyril, Dial, dc Trin. in Petavins de Trin. viii. iv. 10. 
 1!< St. Cyril on St. John, v. 39, vol. iv. p. 475. 
 
 17 
 
194 THE 
 
 and its guilt (reatus) is done away. Whence 
 Augustin says in his book on the Baptism of In- 
 fants, that this is the work which is effected by 
 grace through Baptism, that the old man is cruci- 
 fied, and the body of sin destroyed: yet that this 
 work is not so completely effected, as that while 
 we live, concupiscence is wholly destroyed, but 
 only that what we bring with us into the world, 
 w r ill not injure us after we die." He concludes, 
 therefore, " concupiscence is weakened in Bap- 
 tism, and for this reason it is said to be put away, 
 and not merely because guilt is expunged in it." 19 
 This statement shows how utterly groundless 
 is Mr. Goode's opinion, that the Master of the 
 Sentences imagined original sin to be forgiven, 
 but did not imagine grace to be conferred in 
 Baptism. In concordance with those who pre- 
 ceded him, he did not dissever things, which are 
 in their nature inseparable. For though the for- 
 giveness of sins was purchased once for all upon 
 the Cross, yet it does not belong to any, but those 
 who, through the work of the Holy Ghost, are 
 made members of Christ. Our own Lanfranc had 
 expressed the same truth in the preceding cen- 
 tury, when maintaining that Baptism, without the 
 Holy Eucharist, sufficed for the salvation of in- 
 fants. u 'As many of you as have been baptized 
 into Christ, have put on Christ.' Now, to put on 
 Christ, is to have God as our inhabitant through 
 the remission of sins.*' 29 This, then, was Peter 
 Lombard's notion of the forgiveness of original 
 sin ; it results, according to him, from that ap- 
 
 '-' Lib. it. 30, B. 20 Wilkins's Concilia, i. 36 U 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINIST3. 195 
 
 plication of Christ's merits, which is bestowed by 
 the Holy Ghost on those in whom He takes up 
 His dwelling. Thus, in speaking of Confirmation, 
 he says that its advantage "is the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost for corroboration, as in Baptism the 
 same gift is bestow r ed for the forgiveness of sins." 
 And he quotes an authority, which puts confirma- 
 tion the higher of the two, as bestowing a greater 
 amount of virtue, " although Baptism avails more 
 to forgiveness. And this," he adds, " Raban 
 seems to indicate when saying, that in Baptism 
 the Holy Ghost descends to consecrate a dwelling 
 for God." 21 These passages enable us to discern 
 the nature of that gift of forgiveness of sins, 
 which Lombard attributes to Baptism, It is a 
 gift which, according to his statement, is attained 
 through the presence of the Holy Ghost. When 
 he asserts, therefore, that this gift is bestowed 
 upon all infants, he asserts that in all there is the 
 indwelling of grace. " The external sign, and 
 the thing signified, are received simultaneously 
 by all infants, w T ho are washed from original sin 
 in Baptism." 2 - It is utterly erroneous, therefore, 
 to represent Lombard as doubting that grace is 
 bestowed in Baptism, because he states that the 
 gift which has been imparted needs to be con- 
 tinually augmented as men grow in years, by the 
 further influx of that Blessed Spirit, from whom 
 it originally proceeded. This is all which he has 
 said in the passage quoted by Mr. Goode ; and 
 his meaning is rendered with far more fairness by 
 that honest epitomiser, Dupin : " Dans la qua- 
 
 21 Lib. Sent. iv. 7, A, B. 22 Lib. Sent. iv. 4, A. 
 
196 the church's service 
 
 trieme Distinction il traite des efTets du Bapteme ; 
 comment les uns re9oivent le Sacrement et la 
 Grace du Sacrement, et comment les autres re- 
 coivent le Sacrement sans la Grace, et la Grace 
 sans le Sacrement. II prouve que les enfans re- 
 eoivent Pun et l'autre, et insinue qu'ils re^oivent 
 meme la Grace actuelle qui leur sert dans la suite 
 pour faire de bonnes actions." 
 
 Enough has been said of Lombard. After his 
 time the minds of men took a more speculative turn ; 
 and the nature of that gift, which was expressed 
 by the name of grace, came into consideration. As 
 the Aristotelian theory of habits mingled with the 
 ancient theology, the notion that Divine assistance 
 was nothing else than Christ's presence through 
 the Spirit, was exchanged for the doctrine of habit- 
 ual grace. Inasmuch as " light puts something 
 into the illuminated body, and grace is a sort of 
 light of the soul," it was held that <s in the soul of 
 the justified there was a habit of grace or a- super- 
 natural quality,"* 1 which was something distinct 
 from the spirit which infused it. On this arose the 
 further question, whether the gift of the Spirit, 
 which all admitted to be conferred at Baptism im- 
 plied the infusion of that habit of grace, which was 
 supposed to be its consequence. This, however, is 
 a question which many great writers in the Church 
 of Rome have declared to be immaterial. Out of 
 the host of testimonies, which Morinus has col- 
 lected, it will be enough to quote a few statements 
 from Vasquez. He admits " that there was no dis- 
 pute between the Fathers and the Pelagians about 
 habitual grace ; the only question regarded Divine 
 
 23 Summa Theol. I"* **•■ Q. 110, 1 and 2. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALYINISTS. 197 
 
 assistance." Again he says, " that habitual grace 
 without special assistance is very weak : and the 
 will, even if it has it, needs some external stimu- 
 lant to excite it to action. Habitual grace," he 
 allows, " is not necessary to preserve man from 
 mortal sin ; actual grace preventing and assisting 
 them is sufficient ; and habitual grace contributes 
 little to it." So that Morinus concludes, " if those 
 most learned men of their day, Peter of Poitiers, 
 Peter the Chanter of Paris, Stephen the English- 
 man, PraBpositivus, and the other disciples of Peter 
 Lombard, who were the first to sow the seeds of 
 these questions, had referred rather to the dicta of 
 the ancient Fathers, than to their own logical argu- 
 ments, they would have saved themselves and their 
 successors from falling into worse perplexities than 
 those which Chrysippus suggested — perplexities 
 from w T hich their disciples have never been able to 
 extricate themselves. Therefore, since men of such 
 weight and name in the Church — Soto, Can us, Me- 
 dina, Tapper, Pighius, Stapleton, Molina, Vasquez, 
 teach us as they do about the opinion of the ancient 
 Fathers, and the dogmas of the Schoolmen on this 
 matter ; and since experience convinces those who 
 are versed in the writings of antiquity that their 
 statements are true, I shall take no notice of these 
 ingenious subtleties." 24 It is plain, then, that the 
 question whether the grace infused in Baptism be 
 actual or habitual, was one which arose only out of 
 the reasonings of the Schoolmen, and was wholly 
 irrespective of the inquiry, whether through Baptism 
 infants became the dwelling-place of the Holy Ghost. 
 This last point was assumed by Aquinas, as the 
 
 24 " De Disciplina Paenitolllia:, ,, viii. 7, 11, 12. 
 
 17* 
 
198 i 
 
 basis, on which to found an argument for the in- 
 fusion of virtues. " Baptism, as Augustin says in 
 his book on the baptizing of infants, has this effect, 
 that the baptized are incorporated into Christ as His 
 members. But from Christ the Head, there flows 
 into all His members the plenitude of grace and 
 virtue, according to the words of St. John, ' of His 
 fulness have all we received.' " 25 That which was 
 recognized, therefore, by Pope Innocent in 1250, 
 " as an open question," was not, as Mr. Goode 
 supposes, whether the gift of the Holy Ghost is 
 bestowed in Baptism, respecting which no dispute 
 had existed among the learned men, to whom he 
 alludes ; the question concerned only the nature of 
 the gift ; whether it was merely the Spirit's pre- 
 sence, or that habitual grace, which was supposed 
 to pass in some mysterious manner into human 
 virtues. The question is so wholly independent of 
 Baptismal Regeneration, that it does not appear to 
 be ruled in the Roman Church at the present day. 
 The Council of Trent passed it over. And the 
 doctrine of habitual grace was only declared to be 
 more probable by Clement V., when treated of a. d. 
 1312, at a Council, which was not held, as Mr. 
 Goode supposes, at Vienna, 26 but at the more ap- 
 propriate locality of Vienne, 27 in Dauphiny. So 
 that there exists not a shadow of evidence for 
 supposing that Baptismal grace was denied by any 
 party in the Church from the time of Pelagius to 
 that of Zuinglius. The universal concurrence of 
 
 23 Summa Thcol. iii. Q. 69, 4. 
 
 26 I should attribute this mistake to an error of the press, but 
 that Mr. Goode speaks more than once of what he calls " the 
 Council of Vienna." 
 
 27 Harduin, vii. 1359. 
 
NOT DRAWN U? EY CALVIXISTS. 193 
 
 writers accords with that which was expressed by 
 the ancient rituals; wherein it was entreated for 
 every infant, " ut fiat templum Dei vivi, et Spiritus 
 Sanctus habitet in eo."^ And to suppose that this 
 truth is invalidated by the disputes respecting habit- 
 ual grace, is as if it were denied that Caxton intro- 
 duced printing into England, because stereotype 
 printing was introduced into this country by Wil- 
 liam Ged, in the eighteenth century. 
 
 The question has been treated more at large, 
 because upon it rests Mr. Goode's weightiest argu- 
 ment — that which is drawn from the sentiments of 
 Cranmer. It seems to be admitted, that Cranmer 
 had the main hand in compiling King Edward's 
 first Prayer-Book, and consequently in putting to- 
 gether the bulk of our Baptismal Offices. Mr. 
 Goode, therefore, has sought diligently for proof of 
 Cranmer's accordance with himself; and persuades 
 himself that the result is decisive in his favour. 
 " If it shall appear," he says, " and I believe it to 
 be undeniable, that their doctrine" (i. e. of our 
 Reformers) "was, in the most important points, 
 what is now called c Calvinistic,' there is, or ought 
 to be, an end to the controversy, as to the inter- 
 pretation they intended to be given to our Formu- 
 laries, both as respects Baptism, and several other 
 points." And after quoting various passages 
 from "The Institution of a Christian Man," com- 
 monly attributed to -Cranmer, he speaks of u these 
 remarkable passages," as overthrowing the very 
 foundations of that Laudean system of theology, 
 pressed upon us by some under the name of 
 4 Church principles.' " But Mr. Goode's career of 
 
 28 Martene de Ant. Ritibus, i. 80. 
 
200 the church's service 
 
 success is of necessity checked by one circum- 
 stance. The passages which he selects as so deci- 
 sive, were penned ten years before King Edward's 
 first Prayer-Book, and, therefore, before Cranmer 
 can be supposed, according to any hypothesis, to 
 have shaken off that belief in Baptismal grace, 
 which he must have acquired in his childhood. 
 For it happens curiously enough, that the passages 
 which Mr. Goode supposes to be most favourable to 
 him in Cranmer's writings, are taken from the 
 " Articles about Religion," a. d. 1536, " The In- 
 stitution of a Christian Man," a. d. 1537, and 
 Cranmer's remarks upon the same, a. d. ]538. 
 And hence arises the absolute necessity under 
 which Mr. Goode is placed, of proving that the 
 Church of Rome, before the Council of Trent, did 
 not teach Baptismal Regeneration, any more than 
 the Church of England. To this opinion he fre- 
 quently recurs; " we have already seen," he says, 
 " how much the Romanists were divided among 
 themselves on the question of the effects of Bap- 
 tism in infants, previously to the Council of Trent." 
 Whereas, that grace is bestowed upon infants in 
 Baptism, has been shown to have been the unani- 
 mous and unquestioned opinion of the Mediaeval 
 Church; and, singularly enough, this particular 
 point has been taken for granted by the Council of 
 Trent, 90 and not supposed to require separate notice. 
 
 29 So observes Bishop Davenant, when maintaining that the 
 Roman Church has not decided that habits are infused at Bap- 
 tism; he says, " Addo, Concilium Tridentinum non sic statu- 
 isse." — [Letter to Ward.] When Perrone, therefore, would 
 establish the agency of grace, as doing away original sin in 
 Baptism, he refers to the Scriptures, and to the testimony of the 
 Ancient Church, and accounts lor the omission of this subject 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 201 
 
 So that to suppose Cranmer to have dissented from 
 the universal belief, ten years before he ceased to 
 employ the ancient Service-Books, is to attribute to 
 him a disingenuousness as strange as it is discredit- 
 able. For the very year in which the Articles about 
 Religion " were put forth, Cranmer acted as God- 
 father 30 at the christening of King Edward the VI." 
 If he really disbelieved in the gift of Baptismal 
 grace, how could he have taken part in such ser- 
 vices as the Adjuration? "Retire, Satan, from 
 this servant of God, because Our God and Lord 
 Jesus Christ has vouchsafed to call him for Himself 
 to His grace and blessing, and the font of Baptism 
 by the gift of the Holy Ghost." 31 Or take the 
 words which Cranmer himself probably used at the 
 Child's Confirmation : 32 " Almighty, eternal God, 
 who has vouchsafed to regenerate this Thy servant 
 by water and the Holy Ghost, and hast given to 
 him remission of all his sins, send down upon him 
 Thy sevenfold Spirit." 33 Or take, as still more dis- 
 tinctive, the consecration of the font, which, whether 
 used on that occasion or no, was a constituent part 
 
 by the Council of Trent. " Licet vero Concilium in eo non 
 loquatur exprcsse nisi de reatu peccati originalis, prout ferebat 
 ejus scopus; evidens taraen est, per gratiam, qua? ope Baptismi 
 infunditur, tolli reatum," &c. — Vroelec. Theol. vol. vi. De Bap- 
 tismo, 170. 
 
 30 " In October, on St. Edward's even, was born at Hampton 
 Court, the noble Impe. Prince Edward, whose Godfathers at the 
 Christening were the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Duke 
 Norfolk, &c., and at the Bishopyng was Godfather the Duke of 
 Suffolk, &c. — Grafton's Chronicle. 
 
 31 Maskell's Monumenta Ritualia. i. 7. 
 
 32 It appears from Grafton that he confirmed Elizabeth imme- 
 diately after he had acted as her Sponsor at Baptism. 
 
 38 Maskell, i. 34. 
 
202 the church's service 
 
 of the ancient offices. " May the Holy Ghost im- 
 pregnate this water, which has been prepared for 
 the regeneration of men, with the secret admixture 
 of His own light : that through the sanctification 
 conceived from Him, there may emerge from the 
 unpolluted womb of the Divine fountain, a celestial 
 seed, re-born into a new being." "May the font 
 be living, its water regenerating, its wave purify- 
 ing. That all who are to be washed in this salu- 
 tary laver, through the operation within them of the 
 Holy Ghost, may obtain the blessing of perfect 
 purification." 34 
 
 How can such expressions harmonize with un- 
 belief in Baptismal blessings ? Nor need Cranmer 
 be supposed to have been acting under compul- 
 sion, if he sanctioned such statements as these, 
 since he retained some of the most significant of 
 the ancient usages in King Edward's days, when 
 it was safe for him to follow his own will ; and it 
 was only in the Second Book of King Edward, 
 a. d. 1552, that at Bucer's instance they were 
 omitted. If we would understand Cranmer's po- 
 sition, then, up to 1548, we must take into ac- 
 count those parts of the Service, which at that 
 time, and acting on his own motion, he retained 
 in it. Of this kind is not only the benediction of 
 the w r ater, since happily restored, but the adjura- 
 tion and the delivery of the Chrisome. " Take 
 this white vesture, for a token of the innocency, 
 which by God's grace in this holy Sacrament of 
 Baptism is given unto thee." These seem to be 
 sufficient evidences of Cranmer's mind. But if a 
 
 Maskell, vol. i. 19. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 203 
 
 dogmatical statement be preferred, such an one 
 may be found in the articles of agreement with 
 the Germans, a. d. 1538, which Dr. Jenkyns 35 has 
 identified with Cranmer's authority. After stating 
 that "in adults, besides contrition, there must be 
 faith, in those promises which the Sacraments 
 exhibit," the Article on the Sacraments goes on 
 to say, " as to infants, since it would be rash to 
 exclude them from the mercy of God, especially 
 when Our Lord says in the Gospel, ' suffer the 
 little children to come unto Me, for of such is the 
 kingdom of heaven; 7 and again, 'unless one be 
 born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter 
 into the Kingdom of Heaven,' and since by the 
 perpetual custom of the Catholic Church from the 
 times of the Apostles, it has been received that 
 infants ought to be baptized for the remission of 
 sins and for salvation ; we say that the Holy Ghost 
 is efficacious in them, and purifies them in Bap- 
 tism." 36 Now, with these facts before us, we may 
 surely retort upon Mr. Goode his own argument, 
 and say, " here then, in this very document of 
 1537, we find, an end of the whole controversy." 
 For his whole position rests upon the statement, 
 first, that the Reformers were Calvinists ; secondly, 
 that Calvinists cannot believe Baptismal Regene- 
 ration. But the strongest ground which he can 
 find, that on which alone he rests as deciding the 
 matter, consists of expressions, which were used 
 by Cranmer, at a time when it cannot be dis- 
 ss '< There ean be no doubt, either that the Book of Articles 
 was considered at that time of great importance, or that Cran- 
 mer was concerned in framing it," — Jenkyns's Preface, p. xxiii 
 36 Jenkyns's Cranmer, vol. iv. p. 2, 2S6. 
 

 204 the church's service 
 
 puted that he was a firm believer in the doctrine 
 in question. What is the conclusion but that Mr. 
 Goode is mistaken either in thinking that Cran- 
 mer's words really involve an admission of the 
 tenets of Calvin ; or else in supposing that a the- 
 oretic adoption of Calvinism is incompatible with 
 a belief in Baptismal grace ? His argument runs 
 as follows : 
 
 Archbishop Cranmer, a. d. 1536-8, used strong 
 language respecting the Divine decrees. 
 
 Those who use strong language respecting the 
 Divine decrees cannot believe in the re-creation 
 of man through baptismal grace. 
 
 Therefore Crammer did not believe this doc- 
 trine. 
 
 Now for this argument we may substitute the 
 following : 
 
 Archbishop Cranmer, a. d. 1536-8, used strong 
 language respecting the Divine decrees. 
 
 But the re-creation of men through Baptismal 
 Grace was firmly held by Archbishop Cranmer, 
 a. d. 1536-8. 
 
 Therefore this doctrine maybe believed by those 
 who hold strong language respecting the Divine 
 decrees. 
 
 Now this conclusion is absolutely fatal to Mr. 
 Goode's argument ; for the great weight, which 
 he has attached to these statements of Cranmer — 
 the prominent place in which he has put them — 
 shows that if these passages do not make out his 
 case, he has no others which can do so. He has 
 no other words so strong, by which to show that 
 the Reformers agree w T ith him ; and if the use of 
 equivocal expressions was compatible with a be- 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 205 
 
 lief in baptismal grace in Cranmer who compiled 
 the service, it is so in others who have adopted it. 
 Here, then, so far as strict argument goes, we 
 might stop ; but I proceed to give some elucida- 
 tions of the passages extracted. They are taken 
 from the " Formularies of Faith," published at 
 Oxford, a. d. 1825. Of these the "Articles about 
 Religion," and the " Institution of a Christian 
 Man," were supposed to have been written by 
 Cranmer, or under his influence ; in the " Necessary 
 Doctrine and Erudition," which followed a. d. 
 1543, he probably had less participation. The 
 passages, however, which Mr. Goode has drawn 
 from the two first works, only illustrate the rule, 
 which has been attributed to the Fathers, that they 
 sometimes speak of God's grace in respect to its 
 gift, and sometimes in respect to its employment. 
 Now, 37 regarded in the latter light, the possession 
 of God's grace is equivalent to the certainty of sal- 
 vation. In the passages before us accordingly, 
 grace, election, predestination, are spoken of as the 
 possession of God's people, but the statememt (as 
 shall be shortly shown) is unaccompanied by those 
 characteristic distinctions, which are required to 
 give it a Calvinistic force. Another circumstance 
 may be observed in these extracts ; a tendency, 
 namely, to that peculiar view of justifying faith (at 
 one time strongly advocated by Luther,) whereby 
 its essential quality was supposed to lie in the cer- 
 
 37 Peter Lombard could say: " Prsodestinatorum nullus vide- 
 tur posse damnari, nee reproborum aliquis posse salvari." But 
 he adds : Si enim cum dicis, Predaestinatus non potest damnari, 
 intelligas ita, id est, non potest esse ut prsedestinatus sit et dam- 
 netur, verum dicis," — Lib. Senten. i. 40, B. 
 18 
 
206 
 
 tainty which each man entertained of his own sal- 
 vation. This opinion Luther was compelled by 
 experience to modify; and Cranmer took a very 
 different view of things when he subsequently 
 penned that Homily of Salvation, to which our 
 Article refers us. Some of the strongest passages 
 which Mr. Goode selects, are built upon this last 
 principle. And yet it is not a principle, which is 
 tied necessarily to the system of Calvin : Luther, 38 
 by whom it had been introduced, was writing 
 strongly against the principles of Necessity, in the 
 very year in which the " Articles about Religion" 
 appeared ; and the persons among whom the notion 
 most prevails at the present day, are the Arminian 
 Methodists. For, in truth, this principle is intro- 
 duced into the Formularies before us, as a part of 
 that w T ork of Contrition, to which all sinners are 
 exhorted. One requisite to Contrition has always 
 been supposed to be the hope of pardon. And this 
 
 38 Men should not turn their eyes on the secret sentence of 
 Election, Foreknowledge, and Predestination, as they are call- 
 ed; for such speeches lead to douhts, security, or despair: are 
 you elected 1 no fall can hurt you, and you cannot perish — are 
 you not elected ] there is no remedy for it. These are shocking 
 speeches, and men ought not to fix their hearts on such thoughts ; 
 but the Gospel refers us to the proclaimed word of God, wherein 
 He has revealed His will, and through which he will he known, 
 and will work." " For if a man was to rule his life according 
 tc the secret counsels of God, we could make nothing of God's 
 command of the Gospel, of the Sacrament, yea, of Christ Him- 
 self, but should go over head into excess like swine." — Luther s 
 Letters, No. 1753, [Dc Wette.] 
 
 " The statements which here occur," says Scckendorf, "show 
 what was Luther's view upon this subject, and what interpreta- 
 tion we ought to give to some overstrong statements of his, 
 which are elsewhere to be met with." — Hist. Lib. 3, xlix. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 207 
 
 hope, set forth in a somewhat unguarded form, and 
 unaccompanied by the qualifications which are usu- 
 ally associated with it, has been mistaken by Mr. 
 Goode for the assertion of Calvinism. 
 
 But how is the diversity of the two systems to 
 be established ? What proof can be brought, that 
 Calvinism was not really designed ? We must seek 
 for some discriminating condition, by which the 
 one system may be known from the other. Such 
 a means of discrimination is afforded by the circum- 
 stance, that while Calvinism bases man's Predes- 
 tination on an arbitrary decree, whereby some per- 
 sons are assigned to happiness and others to misery 
 (thus applying a coercive force to the ultimate 
 springs of action, and superseding the responsibility 
 of man,) the " Institution of a Christian man," on 
 the contrary, assumes that salvation may be attained 
 by all, and that a confiding faith is that appointed 
 mean, through which men are to attain it. No 
 doubt Calvinists would often express the same hope, 
 but in them such a profession would be the same 
 happy inconsistency which enables them to admit 
 the doctrine of baptismal grace. And therefore 
 this inconsistency cannot be pleaded by those who 
 maintain, at the same time, that their system is incom- 
 patible with a belief in Sacramental efficacy. And 
 this is the particular position which Mr. Goode 
 claims for Cranmer. The archbishop's argument, 
 as he understands it, is as follows: 
 
 All who are members of the Church will be 
 saved. 
 
 But God's grace is not given to any except mem- 
 bers of the Church. 
 
 Therefore God's grace is not given to any but 
 
208 the church's service 
 
 those who will finally be saved. Now, the defect 
 in Mr. Goode's conclusion arises from the same 
 cause which has already been pointed out ; the 
 Church is spoken of by Cranmer in a twofold 
 sense ; 39 in one case it is used for those to whom 
 its blessings are giveji, in the other for those by 
 whom they are employed. Such variety in the 
 mode of speaking has the highest authority. "I 
 am the vine : ye are the branches." " Every 
 branch in Me that beareth not fruit He taketh 
 away." Here is a sense in which Judas was a 
 branch in the True Vine, and a sense in which he 
 was not so. This double mode of speaking is 
 professedly employed by Cranmer in the work be- 
 fore us. He speaks of those who, for u obstinate 
 persevering in mortal sin," " shall finally be found 
 either to be out of the same Church, or else to be 
 as dead members therein." 40 No doubt he exhorts 
 every one to such faith as that he should be able to 
 say, " undoubtedly I trust that I am united and 
 corporated as a living member into this Catholic 
 Church." Again, 
 
 " I believe that in this catholic Church, I and all the lively and 
 quick members of the same, shall continue, and from time to 
 time, so long as we shall live here on earth, obtain remission 
 and forgiveness of all our sins, as well original as actual, by the 
 merits of Christ's blood and His Passion, and by the virtue and 
 efficacy of Christ's Sacraments, instituted by Him for that pur- 
 pose, so oft as we shall worthily receive the same. 41 
 
 39 The twofold way of speaking of the Church, is enlarged 
 upon in the Articles agreed upon by Cranmer with the Lutheran 
 Delegates : " Ecclesia acceptiones duas habet pracipuas,'' &c. — ■ 
 Jenkyn&'s Cranmer, iv. 277. 
 
 40 Formularies, p. 59. 41 Ibid. p. 58. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 209 
 
 But with these passages are united various refer- 
 ences 42 to final judgment, and to the possibility ot 
 self-deception, as well as assertions like that which 
 concludes our Seventeenth Article, of the general 
 applicability of the promises of God. 
 
 These statements, however, are not decisive. 
 Some certain criterion is wanted, if we would sepa- 
 rate Cranmer's words from the Calvinistic system. 
 And such a criterion is provided by one of those 
 passages, which Mr. Goode has himself selected — 
 a passage so distinct, that he would surely have 
 observed it, but for the hurry with which he pro- 
 fesses that his work was written. For it is mani- 
 fest that if Cranmer was precluded from admitting 
 Baptismal Regeneration, by that rigid system of 
 Calvinism which excludes all except those who 
 
 41 "All they transgress this commandment, which either so 
 much presume upon the mercy of God that they fear not His 
 justice, and by reason hereof still continue in their sin ; or else 
 so much fear His justice, that they have no trust in His mercy, 
 and by reason thereof fall into desperation." — Formularies. 
 p. 133. 
 
 "If in his lifetime he had not this right faith and belief in 
 Christ, or having opportunity, did not express this obedience, 
 but transgressed the laws of God, and so died without repen- 
 tance, although he pretended and said that he believed never so 
 much, and trusted in Christ's benefits never so much, yet shall 
 he be judged and condemned to the everlasting pains of hell." 
 Id. p. 71. 
 
 " It is greatly to be wished and desired, that as all Christian 
 men do know the same, so that every man might knowledge 
 and undoubtedly believe the same to be true and verified, even 
 upon himself; so that both he may humble himself to God, and 
 knowledge himself a miserable sinner not worthy to be called 
 his son, and yet surely trust that to him, being repentant, God's 
 mercy is ready to forgive. — Annot- 86 on the Kind's Book. Jen- 
 kyns, ii. p. 93. 
 
 18* 
 
210 
 
 will be saved from any real communication of spir- 
 itual blessings, he could not have spoken of per- 
 sons who will finally be impenitent as partaking of 
 grace. But what does he say ? " Forasmuch as 
 they," i. e., the wicked, " do live in the common 
 society or company of those which be the very 
 quick and living members of Christ's Mystical 
 Body, and outwardly do profess, receive, and con- 
 sent with them for a season in the doctrine of the 
 Gospel, and in the right using of the Sacraments ; 
 yea, and oftentimes be endued with right excellent 
 gifts of the Holy Ghost, they be to be accounted 
 and reputed here in this world, to be in the num- 
 ber of the said very members of Christ's Mystical 
 Body, so long as they be not by open sentence of 
 excommunication precided and excluded from the 
 same." 43 Now, although it is plainly admitted, as 
 Cranmer goes on to mention, that such persons are 
 not members of Christ " in very deed," that they 
 cannot be looked at as portions of the Church if 
 the employment of grace be considered, how can 
 it be doubted that he attributed this failure, not to 
 the absence of the gift of grace, but to the careless- 
 ness which omitted to improve it ? 
 
 The work under consideration contains, more- 
 over, not a few distinct statements, that an especial 
 gift of grace is bestowed in Holy Baptism. The 
 u Articles about Religion" open with a statement 
 that, touching the Holy Sacrament of Baptism, 
 men must believe " those things which hath been 
 always, by the whole consent of the Church ap- 
 proved, received, and used." 44 Now this of ne- 
 
 43 Formularies, p. 54. 4l Ibid. p. 6. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 211 
 
 cessity carries us back to the statements of the 
 Council of Orange, where a gift of grace is said 
 to be bestowed upon all the baptized. Then fol- 
 low various assertions, as, for instance, that those 
 " who minister the sacraments of God," " by the 
 same confer and give the graces of the Holy 
 Ghost:" 45 that the circumstances whereby Bap- 
 tism and the Holy Eucharist are discriminated from 
 various other Christian ordinances, is that " they 
 have annexed and conjoined unto their said visible 
 signs such spiritual graces, as whereby our sins be 
 remitted and forgiven." 49 The distinction is care- 
 fully drawn between- the efficacy of the work 
 wrought upon the cross, and the efficacy of the 
 work of the minister ; the first is shown to contri- 
 bute its whole value to the ordinance: "priests 
 and ministers do break this" (third) " command- 
 ment, if, in the administration of the Sacraments, 
 they yield not the whole efficacy, virtue and grace, 
 thereof to our Lord, as the very author of the same ; 
 but ascribe the said efficacy, virtue and grace, 
 or any part thereof, to themselves:" 47 but at the 
 same time, we are told that " though parents be 
 never so clean purged and pardoned of their origi- 
 nal sin by Baptism, and by the grace and mercy 
 of God, .... yet, nevertheless the children be 
 full of corruption of original sin, until that by Bap- 
 tism in the blood of Our Saviour Jesus Christ, they 
 be washed and purged as their parents were." 48 
 But what can possibly be clearer than the follow- 
 ing passage ? Among the points of belief is said to 
 be: — 
 
 45 Formularies, p. 101. 46 Ibid. p. 129. 
 
 u Ibid. p. 140. 4S Ibid. p. 187. 
 
212 
 
 THE CHURCH S SERVICE 
 
 "That it is offered unto all men as well as infants, as such 
 as have the use of reason, that by Baptism they shall have re- 
 mission of all their sins, the grace and favour of Gotl, and ever- 
 lasting life, 49 according to the saying of Christ, ' whosoever be- 
 lieveth and is baptized shall be saved.' Item — That the promise 
 of grace and everlasting life (which promise is adjoined unto this 
 Sacrament of Baptism) pertaineth not only unto such as have 
 the use of reason, but also to infants, innocents and children ; 
 and that they ought, therefore, and must needs be baptized ; 
 and that by the Sacrament of Baptism they do also obtain re- 
 mission of their sins, the grace and favour of God, and be made 
 thereby the very sons and children of God. Insomuch as in- 
 fants and children dying in their infancy shall undoubtedly be 
 saved thereby, and else not. Item — that infants must needs be 
 christened, because they be born in original sin, which sin 
 must needs be remitted ; which cannot be done but by the 
 Sacrament of Baptism, whereby they receive the Holy Ghost, 
 which exerciseth His grace and efficacy in them, and cleanseth 
 and purifieth them from sin by His most secret virtue and 
 operation." 50 
 
 It seems astonishing that any one should mis- 
 understand this language. But Mr. Goode sees 
 nothing in it, which speaks of children at large ; 
 he thinks it applicable only to those whom a pre- 
 venient decree has marked out for salvation ; and 
 he thinks this explanation may be reconciled with 
 the unqualified language of Cranmer, because 
 similar expressions occur in writers by whom they 
 are modified by qualifications. But Cranmer in- 
 troduces no such qualifications. It had been 
 usual for fifteen centuries, to speak of Baptism as 
 being the instrument whereby infants were united 
 to Christ. The first writers who disputed this 
 truth did not venture to throw off* the established 
 
 49 At this point Cranmer professed himself willing that the 
 following sentence should be inserted : " If they die in that 
 grace, which by the Sacrament of Baptism is conferred to them, 
 and not by sin alter the same." — Jcnkyns's Cran. vol. i. p. 38 
 and 77. 50 Formularies, p. 9o. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 213 
 
 language, but they introduced qualifying circum- 
 stances, by which its efficacy might be limited. 
 And now Mr. Goode would have us suppose that 
 these qualifications not only indicate the judgment 
 of those by whom they were made, but likewise of 
 those by whom they were not made. Cranmer is 
 not to be allowed to speak generally when he says, 
 " by the Sacrament of Baptism infants receive the 
 Holy Ghost," because Calvin could have said as 
 much, if he might have added that he spoke of 
 that which was possible in elect infants. It may 
 be truly affirmed that baptized adults will be 
 saved, if they duly receive and rightly improve 
 this ordinance. But it w r ould not on that account 
 be safe to say, unconditionally, that baptized 
 adults will be saved. Neither would the qualifi- 
 cations which are used by others have justified 
 Cranmer in making this general assertion respect- 
 ing infants, unless he had believed it. And this 
 brings us back to what was shown from external 
 evidence ; i. e. that at that period, at any rate, he 
 could not have disbelieved the doctrine of Baptis- 
 mal Regeneration. If there should be any pas- 
 sages, therefore, in the " Institution of a Christian 
 man," which cannot be explained on the principles 
 previously introduced — any which seem (as Mr. 
 Goode alleges) to have a decidedly Calvinistic 
 bearing, and to derogate from the responsibility 
 of man — I have only to remind the reader that 
 the more strong such passages may appear, the 
 more decisive will be their testimony against Mr. 
 Goode's hypothesis ; since they would prove the 
 more plainly that the Divine decree might be in- 
 cautiously alluded to by men who never ques- 
 
214 
 
 tioned the great truth of the re-creation of fallen 
 Humanity through Sacramental union with the 
 Incarnate Son. 
 
 A period of ten years from the time when 
 Cranmer made his annotations on the King's Book, 
 brings us to the year 1548, in which King Edward's 
 First Prayer-Book was commenced. Now, it is 
 upon the sentiments which he entertained at that 
 time, that the interest of our inquiry into Cran- 
 mer's sentiments is mainly concentrated. For the 
 object is not to know w T hat he thought at large, 
 but to disprove the assertion that those words of 
 our Service-Book, which have come down unal- 
 tered from that period, were drawn up by par- 
 ties w T ho had a personal motive for rendering 
 them equivocal. Whatever notions Cranmer 
 might afterwards have adopted, supposing, of 
 which there is no evidence, that he afterwards al- 
 tered his mind respecting Baptism, as he did re- 
 specting the Eucharist, this circumstance would 
 make no difference in respect to the meaning of 
 those expressions, which the Church had previ- 
 ously taken under her guardianship. 
 
 " Rursus cura patrum cadere et succedere matrum 
 Incipit." 
 
 This circumstance gives peculiar importance to 
 two documents — the first Book of Homilies, which 
 was published the year before, and Cranmer's Ca- 
 techism, published the same year with the com- 
 position of our Baptismal Offices. As a record of 
 his opinions, of course, it is wholly immaterial 
 whether the Archbishop employed Justus Jonas 
 to translate this Catechism from the Latin, or 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 215 
 
 whether he translated it himself, since he pub- 
 lished it under his own name, and prefixed a let 
 ter to King Edward, in which he expressed his 
 hope that " by this little treatise the youth of your 
 Grace's realm may learn to know God. 51 Now, 
 this Catechism not only contains the most distinct 
 statements that Regeneration is bestowed in Bap- 
 tism, but by referring every individual to his Bap- 
 tism, as a test whether he has received the gift of 
 grace or no, it shows that the general statements, 
 that this gift is bestowed upon children in Bap- 
 tism, are meant to be truly universal. Mr. Goode's 
 common objection to general statements of the 
 efficacy of Baptism is, that they are intended to 
 include the case of adults also ; now in adults 
 certain qualifications are required, i. e. faith and 
 repentance, and since such general statements, 
 therefore, must have been designed to admit one 
 exception, they may have been designed to admit 
 another. 
 
 Such a mode of reasoning has been already 
 stated to be a violation of the received adage, ex- 
 cept™ prohat regulam ; by which it is not intended 
 that you may take any exception which you 
 please to every rule, but that the fact of thinking 
 it necessary to justify deviation from a rule in one 
 case, shows that you allow its authority in others. 
 In the instance before us, the statements of Cran- 
 mer and of our Service-Book, that in the case of 
 adults, Our Lord's general promises in Baptism 
 require to be qualified by the condition of faith 
 and repentance, show that in the case of infants, 
 
 61 Jenkyns's Cran. i. 328. 
 
 
216 
 
 in which no such condition is expressed, His ge- 
 neral promises must be understood to be universal. 
 But in the case of this Catechism, the objection 
 which has been noticed cannot even rise. For it 
 is not designed for adults, but for the profit of 
 "children and young people." It states to them 
 the necessity of knowing whether they have re- 
 ceived the grace of the new Dispensation ; and 
 the manner of knowing it. " It is very necessary 
 for us to know how we must be born again, and 
 what this second birth is, without the which we 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Now, 
 what is the means of knowing it? "He that is 
 baptized may assuredly say thus : I am not now 
 in this w T avering opinion, that I only suppose my- 
 self to be a Christian man, but I am in a sure belief 
 that I am made a Christian man. For I know of a 
 surety that I am baptized, and I am sure also that 
 Baptism was ordained of God, and that he which 
 baptized me, did it by God's commission and 
 commandment : and the Holy Ghost doth wit- 
 ness, that he which is baptized hath put upon 
 him Christ. Wherefore the Holy Ghost in my 
 Baptism assureth me that I am a Christian man." 53 
 One more passage shall be extracted from this 
 Catechism. " The second birth is by the water 
 of Baptism, which Paul calleth the bath of rege- 
 neration, because our sins be forgiven us in Bap- 
 tism, and the Holy Ghost is poured into us, as 
 into God's beloved children ; so that by the 
 power and working of the Holy Ghost, we be 
 born again spiritually, and made new creatures. 
 
 52 Fallow's "Baptismal Offices Illustrated," p. 74 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 217 
 
 And so by Baptism we enter into the kingdom of 
 God, and shall be saved for ever, if w r e continue 
 to our lives' end in the faith of Christ." 
 
 It is a matter of some curiosity to see how Mr. 
 Goode can escape the force of such plain language. 
 He freely admits, that in Cranmer's works there 
 occur "statements which, speaking of Baptism in 
 the abstract, connect regeneration with it." But 
 these general statements, he says, both in Cranmer 
 and the Lutherans, are accompanied by quali- 
 fications, which show that they were not meant to 
 be universal. These qualifications he states to 
 arise from two sources, one, that though the pro- 
 mise is made at large, its effect does not follow un- 
 less the child possesses faith, which is not the case 
 with all ; the other qualification is supplied by a 
 Divine decree, whereby some children are arbitra- 
 rily doomed to bliss, and others to misery. No 
 doubt these two views might coincide in the same 
 person, for those who refer to an arbitrary de- 
 cree, might suppose that the gift of faith is the 
 medium through which it operates. But in Mr. 
 Goode's system, the two qualifications do duty 
 in different cases : the Divine decree is commonly 
 refered to ; but when writers speak in a decidedly 
 Anti-Calvinistic manner of the universal offer of 
 grace, as did Luther and still more Melancthon, 
 the argument from the necessity of faith comes in 
 as a reserve. Now the case of Cranmer has been 
 rested on the argument from decrees : the gene- 
 ral language of the Archbishop is supposed to be 
 qualified by that constant reference to a secret 
 sentence on the part of God, which was ever pre- 
 sent, as Mr. Goode feels assured, to his mind. 
 19 
 
218 THE 
 
 Here then the argument from faith is as needless, 
 as Cranmer's own words show it to be inapplicable. 
 For Cranmer, 53 as Mr. Goode himself allows, did 
 not admit the qualification of faith to exist, or be 
 possible in infants : indeed, he quotes approvingly 
 St. Austin's words, that children " have not yet 
 the mind to believe." 54 But when we come to 
 this Catechism, Mr. Goode suddenly passes over 
 from the qualification of decrees to that of faith, 
 and suggests an explanation of Cranmer's words, 
 which is wholly inconsistent with his own previous 
 admissions. The reason appears to be, that the 
 Catechism contains some such distinct statements 
 of an Anti-Calvinistic kind, that it was necessary 
 to have recourse to the other solution. "By Bap- 
 tism we enter into the kingdom of God, and shall 
 be saved for ever, if we continue to our lives 7 end 
 in the faith of Christ." Or again, " when they 
 that believe and be baptized do continue in this 
 their faith to the end of their lives, then God shall 
 raise them up from death to life." 55 Now, Mr. 
 Goode having fully decided, that the words of 
 the Reformers on Regeneration are not to be taken 
 according to their natural sense, and having two 
 qualifications present to his own mind, one or the 
 other of which is to limit all the general expres- 
 sions which they can possibly employ, forgets 
 
 53 In the articles agreed upon with the Lutherans, a. v. 1538, 
 the contrast drawn between children and adults seems to imply, 
 that faith is not required in the former. " Nam in ratione uten- 
 tibus necessum est, ut fides etiam utentis accedat." — Jenkyn^s 
 Cran. iv. p. 28ri. 
 
 54 Cranmer's Works, ii. p. 385. 
 
 55 " Fallow's Baptismal offices," p. 72, 79. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALYINISTS. 219 
 
 that, as regards Cranmer, he has as effectually 
 shut himself out from employing the one, as the 
 Archbishop's own expressions shut him out from 
 employing the other. In the case of this Catechism, 
 therefore, he tells us that " according to the well- 
 known doctrine of Luther, faith is spoken of as 
 essential to the salutary effect of Baptism." That 
 this statement is ungrounded, even as respects 
 Luther, has been already shown ; but if it were 
 true of him, what has this to do with Cranmer? 
 Even if the Catechism were not, as Cranmer's 
 Book against Gardiner says, " translated by him- 
 self, and set forth," yet its very title-page states 
 it to have been "overseen and corrected by the 
 Archbishop." 56 " This little book, by me offered 
 to your Majesty," 57 was received by Edward from 
 Cranmer, and not from the Lutherans ; and the 
 argument from faith cannot therefore be brought 
 in for the occasion, to supply the place of the 
 argument from fatalism. 
 
 The main works of Cranmer, to which Mr. 
 Goode refers, have now been mentioned : his 
 other extracts prove nothing, but that Cranmer 
 asserted that which is held by all Christians, 
 that faith and love are essential, if the recipient 
 would profit by that baptismal gift, which is be- 
 stowed upon him through the re-creation of his 
 nature in Christ. These statements have no ten- 
 dency to show him to have been a Calvinist ; 
 while passages in abundance show that he was 
 not. Take the following w T ords from the First 
 Book of Homilies, published under his auspices: 
 
 56 Stryp^s Cranmer, u. I. 7 Jenkyns's Cran. i. 329. 
 
220 
 
 " Let us beware, good Christian people, lest that 
 we rejecting or casting away God's word, by the 
 which we obtain and retain true faith in God, he 
 not at length cast off so far, that we become as the 
 children of unbelief." 33 Or again take the words 
 of his answer to Gardiner: " As the devil hath 
 no power against Christ, so hath he none against 
 us, so long as we remain grafted in that stock, 
 and be clothed with that apparel, and harnessed 
 with that armour." 59 But the reader shall not be 
 detained by extracts from Cranmer's later works. 
 For the point of moment in this case, is the view 
 which he took at the compilation of the Prayer- 
 Book, a. d. 1548. And again, my purpose is 
 not to show that he asserted the reality of bap- 
 tismal grace, as he does repeatedly in his works 
 against Gardiner: but to prove only, that he was 
 not possessed by such extreme Calvinism, as 
 must render such words unmeaning. Now, it 
 should not be forgotten, that in this case the bur- 
 den of proof lies wholly on those, who would in- 
 terpret our Formularies in a different sense from 
 that which their words naturally convey. From 
 the time of Pelagius it had always been supposed, 
 in conformity with the decree of the Council of 
 Orange, that all baptized infants receive grace. 
 Why, then, are we to attribute any other meanin 
 to the general statements of a similar kind, which 
 occur in the private writings of the Reformers ; 
 
 58 Vide the whole Homily. " A sermon, how dangerous a 
 thing it is to fall from God." It would be easy, of course, to 
 make copious extracts to the same effect from Cranmer's own 
 "Homily of Salvation." 
 
 59 Defence, cap. xii. ; Jcnkyns's Cranmcr, ii. p. 303. 
 
 o* 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 221 
 
 or were introduced into the public offices of the 
 Church ? It is for those who, like Mr. Goode, 
 suggests that some such qualifications are implied, 
 to give distinct proof of it. But Mr. Goode is 
 compelled to allow that, in the case of Cranmer, 
 there is no direct proof that any such qualification 
 was thought of. While he conceives that it may 
 be gathered from "his general doctrine," he ad- 
 mits that " no direct testimony can be obtained 
 from his writings respecting the particular case 
 of infants ; his subject not leading him any 
 where to this point." Now a general concur- 
 rence might be sufficient to prove acquiescence in 
 received opinions ; but what force can it have 
 when a wholly new position is to be adopted ? 
 Why should Cranmer be deemed to mean differ- 
 ently from all his predecessors unless he says so ? 
 Surely, it is a most rash and unwarrantable as- 
 sumption to suppose that his distinct, repeated, 
 and positive assurances, w T ere meant to be set 
 aside, on the ground of a secret condition, of 
 which previous writers had afforded no precedent, 
 and which was never expressed by himself in his 
 numerous works. 
 
 So much respecting Cranmer. But there are 
 two persons, to w r hose judgment Mr. Goode 
 attaches such great importance, as indicating the 
 Archbishop's mind, Peter Martyr and Martin 
 Bucer, that something must be said respecting 
 them. Now, considering that these persons had 
 very recently arrived in England when Edward's 
 first book was published (Martyr about the end 
 of 1547, Bucer some time later,) their previous 
 influer.oe upon Cranmer cannot have been im- 
 19* 
 
222 the church's service 
 
 portant. And since the question of Divine. De- 
 crees had not as yet become a leading matter of 
 controversy, its connexion with the subject of 
 baptismal grace was not a point by which men's 
 agreement or disagreement would be tested. It 
 was very possible, therefore, for the Archbishop 
 to invite and entertain learned foreigners, with 
 whom he agreed on many practical questions of 
 immediate interest, while all along there lay at 
 the bottom such a difference respecting the theory 
 of Necessity, as is indicated by Cranmer's works. 
 That such was the case is sufficiently proved by 
 the fact, that Ochin, who is also said to have re- 
 ceived a specific invitation from Cranmer, and of 
 whom Strype tells us that he was entertained by 
 him along with his other visiters, finally avowed 
 himself a Socinian. Considering the nature of 
 that heresy, it can hardly be supposed that its 
 seeds were not even then latent in his mind. 
 Now this circumstance, of which Strype takes 
 no notice, shows that theoretical differences may 
 have existed among those, whom the Archbishop 
 found useful assistants in his practical designs. 
 
 The authority of Bucer has no doubt been the 
 more referred to, because he had been engaged 
 in drawing up the Cologne Service-Book of Arch- 
 bishop Herman, a. d. 1543. This was no doubt 
 consulted in the revision of our baptismal service ; 
 and a single Prayer, the Thanksgiving after the 
 Gospel, has not been traced higher. But then it 
 must be remembered that the Cologne Service- 
 Book was drawn from that of Nuremberg, which 
 itself was only a re-casting of the ancient bap- 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 223 
 
 tismal office of Germany. When Dr. Pusey 60 pub- 
 lished the modern baptismal Offices in a tabular 
 form, he was led by its internal structure to class 
 Herman's Service among those of " Churches 
 upon the Ancient Model," by way of discrimi- 
 nating it from those of the " Reformed Churches." 
 The use therefore which was made by our Re- 
 formers of Herman's Service-Book, did not imply 
 any accordance with the private opinions of 
 Bucer, since it was only one instance of that rule 
 which has been pointed out by Mr. Scott ; 
 " whence did the Church of England derive all 
 the peculiar language, which she employs con- 
 cerning newly-baptized infants? She did not 
 invent it, she borrowed it from primitive times." 61 
 And further, it must be remembered that Bucer 
 occupied an intermediate position, which, in many 
 respects brought him nearer to the Lutherans, by 
 whom the doctrine of baptismal grace was affirmed, 
 than to the Zuinglians, by whom it was rejected. 
 In compiling Herman's Service-Book, he had 
 been associated with Melancthon; and it was not 
 possible therefore that in that case, he should 
 have adopted the Anti-Sacramental system. 
 Again, in 1536, he had joined in articles of 
 agreement with the Lutherans, in which the 
 reality of Baptismal grace is plainly admitted. It 
 is to be regretted that Mr. Goode, who refers to 
 this conference at Wittenberg, does not insert the 
 resolutions which were adopted. 63 They are 
 
 00 "Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism," first edit. a. d. 1836. 
 
 61 Scott's Defence, p. 47. 
 
 62 " Cumque de talibus infantibus, qui sunt in Ecclesia dictum 
 sit: Non est voluntas Tatris, ut pcreat unus ex illis; constat 
 
224: 
 
 introduced in Bucer's " Scripta Anglicana," as 
 though indicating the principles which were 
 avowed by him when he came into this country. 
 Now these articles show that he fully adopted the 
 tenet of Baptismal grace — in that sense, in which 
 it was understood by Luther and Melancthon. 
 If his words then were inconsistent with some 
 theoretic notions of the Divine Decrees, which 
 were not shared by those with whom he professed 
 agreement, it by no means follows that he was 
 practising any dishonest concealment ; for the 
 different fragments of which his judgment was 
 composed, may have remained in his mind, 
 without being fitted together. And this is the 
 true cause of those orthodox expressions, which 
 found their way even into various Zuinglian Con- 
 fessions ; so that to trace a work to "a staunch 
 Calvinist," is no proof as Mr. Goode seems to 
 suppose, that it may not speak the language of 
 the ancient Church. 
 
 infantibus per baptismum conlingere remissionem peccati origi- 
 nalis, et donationem Spiritus S. qui in eis efficax est pro ipso- 
 rum mode. Rejicimus enim errorem illorum, qui imaginantur 
 infantes placere Deo, et salvos fieri sine actione ilia Dei, cum 
 Christus clare dicat, nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu, 
 non potest intrare in regnum Dei. 
 
 " Et si igitur nos non intelligamus, qualis sit ilia actio Dei in 
 infantibus, tamen certum est in eis novos et sanctos motus 
 effici : sicut et in Joanne in utero matris novi motus fiebant. 
 Nam etiamsi non est imaginandum, quod infantes intelligant, 
 tamen illi motus et inclinationes ad credendum Christo, et 
 diligendum Deum sunt aliquo modo similes motui fidei et di- 
 lectionis. Hoc dicimus, cum infantes dicimus fidem habere. 
 Ideo enim sic loquimur, ut intelligi possit, quod infantes non 
 tiant sancti et salvi sine actione divina in ipsis." — Bueen 
 Scripta Anglic, p. 668. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 225 
 
 And here I must protest against the injustice 
 with which Mr. Goode treats Archbishop Laurence. 
 I say nothing of the criminative tone which Mr. 
 Goode employs respecting living writers of every 
 rank ; both because it would be a needless pre- 
 sumption to interfere in such personal questions, 
 and because I am satisfied that language of this 
 sort is its own best antidote. Neither would I 
 enter upon a general defence of Archbishop 
 Laurence : indeed, I am ready to allow that it 
 may be said of him in a measure, as it was of 
 JBullinger, l qu l il Melancthonizait : had it been 
 otherwise he would not have taken for granted 
 the unjust accusations of the Lutheran writers 
 against the Schoolmen. But to Mr. Goode's 
 hostile judgment I would oppose the opinion of 
 a less partial writer, who speaks of Laurence's 
 Bampton Lectures, as " a work which contains, 
 in small space, a larger quantity of valuable ma- 
 terials and original research, than almost any 
 work I ever met with." 63 The point, however, 
 to which I desire to call present attention, is the 
 charge which Mr. Goode founds upon the case 
 ofBucer. " Laurence," he says, "has by some 
 unaccountable mistake, put down" Bucer " as a 
 Lutheran, and hence used arguments grounded 
 upon Bucer's case to the infinite damage of his 
 own cause."- 31 Now it is not true, on the one 
 
 03 Faber, on "Primitive Election," p. 214. 
 
 64 And again; "in short, the Archbishop has made a series of 
 mistakes, and in consequence landed himself upon ground, where 
 all that is left to him is to surrender at discretion. He has 
 imagined Bucer to be a Lutheran," &c. — Id. p. 405. 
 
 "Nulli gravis cat percussus Achilles." 
 
226 the church's service 
 
 hand, that Laurence puts down Bucer as a Lu- 
 theran ; nor yet on the other was Bucer an Anti- 
 Lutheran, as Mr. Goode's language would seem 
 to imply. Laurence speaks of him as a mediator 
 between the parties of Luther and Zuingle, who 
 on the subject of the Eucharist was followed in a 
 measure by Calvin. 05 Again, he observes upon 
 the contrariety which existed between him and 
 the Lutheran leaders, noticing, therefore, that 
 Bucer was " not a too. favourable judge" 63 of the 
 sentiments of Melancthon. Again, when men- 
 tioning that " the leaders of the Reformation on 
 both sides assembled at Wittenberg," a. d. 1536, 
 he adds, " Bucer spoke on the part of the 
 Zuinglians." 67 Indeed, it would seem that the 
 charge, repeated more than once, that Bucer had 
 been mistaken for a Lutheran, is grounded only 
 upon the fact that Laurence speaks of the lan- 
 guage of Herman's Service as Lutheran. But 
 for this expression Laurence gives ample grounds 
 — namely, that Melancthon co-operated with 
 Bucer in the compilation of the Cologne Office ; 
 and further, that "it was not original, but in a 
 great degree borrowed from a Liturgy previously 
 established at Norimberg." Gs So that Laurence 
 really represents Bucer as more completely iden- 
 tified with the Zuinglians, than, considering his 
 
 65 Bampton Lecture, ii. p. 48. 
 
 66 Id. note 13, on Scrm. vii. 
 
 67 "Doctrine of the Church of England upon the Efficacy of 
 Baptism Vindicated from Misrepresentation," by Richard 
 Laurence, part i. p. 90. 
 
 6S Bamp. Lect. note ii. on Serm. viii. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 227 
 
 accordance with Luther in 1536, can be alto- 
 gether justified. 
 
 Even as respects Peter Martyr, Mr. Goode's 
 strictures upon Laurence are hardly justifiable. 
 "It is likewise certain," says Laurence, " that 
 both immediately before and after" Martyr's " ar- 
 rival here, the sentiments of Cranmer were com- 
 pletely at variance with his, upon one of the most 
 important topics of the day, viz., the Sacramental 
 Presence." On this passage Mr. Goode observes, 
 that " evidence is producible that" Laurence " was 
 mistaken." What is the evidence ? It appears 
 from letters recently printed, and to which 
 Laurence had no access, that, September 28th, 
 1548, Cranmer was said, by one who probably 
 agreed with Martyr, to have " come over to our 
 opinion ;" and that on the 14th December fol- 
 lowing, " contrary to general expectation" he 
 avowed the same. But when did Martyr come 
 into England ? He left Strasburg in November, 
 1547, and was in England before the end of the 
 year. And, therefore, that Cranmer should be 
 spoken of as having " come over" to his opinion 
 the following autumn, if so it were, is no proof 
 that Laurence " was mistaken" in supposing that 
 they differed "immediately after his arrival." 
 But there is no proof that these foreigners had at 
 any time that complete agreement with the Eng- 
 lish Baptismal Service, which Mr. Goode attributes 
 to them. Their approbation of it is limited alto- 
 gether to that second Revision, from which Bucer's 
 influence had obtained the omission of a most im- 
 portant part — the Prayer of Consecration, which 
 
228 
 
 has been since restored. And Beza 69 vindicates 
 Bucer from the imputation either of having been 
 concerned in the compilation of our Prayer-Book, 
 or of having agreed with it. In respect to Peter 
 Martyr, the evidence of dissent is still more de- 
 cisive. For it is admitted, that in the composition 
 of the Baptismal Office, Lutheran models were 
 freely followed, and when Cranmer would explain 
 the nature of Baptism, he employed a Catechism 
 derived from German sources. But Martyr's 70 
 judgment of the Lutheran Formularies was so 
 entirely hostile, that he objected to employ the 
 
 69 " Quod ad illarn Anglicanam Reformationem attinet, quum 
 dicis earn ex Buceri consilio ac voluntate fuisse institutam, mag- 
 nam optimo viro injuriam facis," &c. "Nedum ut ilia forma 
 Anglicana acquieverit, cujus ilium auctorem falso et impudenter 
 facis." — Bezce Trac. Theol. ii. 323. Vide. Laurence's Bamp. 
 Led. note 20, in Serm. ii. 
 
 70 Some English exiles at Frankfort " carried their children to 
 be baptized by Lutheran Priests." Martyr, when consulted, 
 objected to the practice. " They said, < the difference was not 
 so great between us in the matter of the Sacrament.' But 
 Martyr said, ' it was of great moment, because in it there was a 
 contest concerning the chief head of religion.' They added, 
 ♦ that the Lutheran divines did think, in the matter of baptism, 
 as they did !' But Martyr answered ' that they were mistaken; 
 for those divines affirmed more of the Sacrament than is Jit ,- 
 a:id tied the grace of God to Baptism ; and that they thought 
 there was no salvation without baptism ; and that they affirmed 
 that infants had faith." — Strype's Cranmer, B. iii. cap. xv. 
 How incomplete was Martyr's approval of our Service-Book, is 
 manifest ai*o from his own words to Bullinger, after the com- 
 pletion of the second Liturgy. He writes, June, 1552, " Re- 
 formatio in Anglia ob rem sacramentariam ohtineri nequit. 
 Liber tamen rituum ecclesiae ac administrationis sacramentorum 
 est emendatus. An usus sacramentorum gratiam Dei conferat, 
 magnopcre inter se disceptant Angli, qui ab operum mentis vix 
 avelli possunt." — CardweU's Liturgies of Edward, Introduc- 
 tion, p. xxxiii. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 229 
 
 services of those who used them. And his objec- 
 tion seems to have rested upon that very asser- 
 tion of the reality of Baptismal grace, which 
 they share with the Offices of the Church of 
 England. 
 
 From the First Book of King Edward, I pass at 
 once to the additions to our Catechism after the 
 Hampton Conference." For the alteration of the 
 Prayer-Book, a. d. 1552 (King Edward's Second 
 Book,) and its resumption in the first year of Eliz- 
 abeth, a. d. 1559, were events by which the mean- 
 ing of our present offices are not affected. The 
 great change in 1552 was the excision of many 
 important usages. But the question respects not 
 the meaning of that which was excinded, but of 
 that which remains. Neither is it necessary to 
 take any notice of the controversy on Free Will, 
 which divided the Reformers in the time of Mary. 
 A book, it seems, was written by Ridley, which 
 has not come down to us. From the character of 
 the man, and his own mention that he feared to 
 make any assertion, to which the very words of 
 Scripture did not lead him, it seems wholly impos- 
 sible that he should have made any rash state- 
 ments respecting the Divine Decrees. And had 
 he done so, the Calvinistic party which for a 
 time was in the ascendent, was not likely to have 
 allowed his book to be forgotten. But it could 
 indicate nothing respecting the meaning of those 
 statements of our Service-Book, which had already 
 been fixed by the Church. 
 
 The addition made to the Catechism after the 
 Hampton Conference, a. d. 1604, is of considerable 
 importance in the present inquiry, in consequence 
 
230 
 
 of the subjects respecting which it treats. All 
 which it is necessary to say here, is that its sup- 
 posed author, Bishop Overall, was certainly not 
 so wedded to Calvinistic opinions, as to be unable 
 to assent, himself, to those distinct statements 
 respecting Baptismal grace, into which his words 
 have guided so many generations. His views on 
 the subject are explained with great clearness in a 
 (Latin) statement, which Mr. Goode attributes to 
 him ; and with still more fulness in a very interest- 
 ing letter on the subject which he addressed to 
 Grotius. Their peculiarity lies in this circumstance 
 — that after setting forth the general doctrine of 
 God's Decrees, somewhat in the manner which has 
 been attributed to the ancient Church in the last 
 Chapter, and affirming that sufficient grace is be- 
 stowed upon all members of Christ's Body ; he 
 proceeds to speak of a second and specific Decree 
 (to which he supposed that St. Austin first called 
 attention,) the object whereof is to bestow upon 
 some few persons an irresistible gift of grace, 
 which is never departed from. " This second 
 Decree," he says, " does not supersede the pre- 
 vious arrangement" (whereby men are elected 
 into the membership of the Church,) "but com- 
 pletes it ; and, therefore, this system also is pious, 
 or at least admissible." The objections to this 
 notion are explained with great clearness by 
 Hammond, 71 who shows that its results may " ra- 
 
 71 " Your supposed intricacy is what it is that makes sufficient 
 grace to be effectual to any. 1 say the parable of the sower 
 was intended by Christ on purpose to answer that question, for 
 here we see, the seed being the same (whether that were the 
 Word or grace it matters not, as long as it is remembered that 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 231 
 
 tlier be attributed to God's special Providence, 
 than His special grace." 72 But whether this, as 
 Hammond seems to have imagined, was Overall's 
 design, or whether he supposed that while the 
 majority would owe their salvation to sufficient 
 grace, a few persons might be favoured with a 
 gift which was irresistible, it is clear, at all events, 
 that he had no such adherence to the Calvinistic 
 system, as would be incompatible with the doc- 
 trine of baptismal grace. For he speaks of the 
 denial that sufficient grace is given to all members 
 of the Church, as a position which was not to be 
 tolerated, 73 inasmuch as it militated against the 
 
 the Word is the vehicle of grace, and the instrument of convey- 
 ing it to the heart,) all the difference taken notice of is only in 
 the soil," &c. — Hammond's Second Letter to Sanderson, Works, 
 i. 685. Compare the ancient Canon against re-baptizing : 
 " Quia non inhcit semen seminantis iniquitas." — Wilkiris's Con- 
 di i. 5. 
 
 72 u In Overall's scheme the effectualness seems to be attributed 
 to the giving what is given tempore congruo, at a time (whether 
 by sickness or by any other circumstance of their state) they are 
 foreseen by God to be so qualified and disposed, that they shall 
 infallibly accept Christ offered, on His own conditions, and so 
 convert and receive the seed into good ground, and so persevere 
 and be saved, when the same man, out of those circumstances, 
 would not have been wrought on by the same means. And if 
 this be it which you mean, as I doubt not that it is, and herein 
 you agree with Bishop Overall," &c. — Hammond's Letter to 
 Sanderson, concerning God's Grace and Decrees, Works, i. 676. 
 
 73 "Alice sentential ex utraque parte, siveex solo absoluto de- 
 creto Dei, sive ex praevisa co-operatione humana, quae ultra pro- 
 greditur, ut aut ex una parte sic faciant homines hberos ut simul 
 faciant sacriiegos, aut ex altera parte sic adstruant decreturn Dei 
 absolulum gratiamque efficacem, ut tollant voluntateni salutis 
 communis conditionalem, et gratiam sufficientem, nullo modo in 
 ecclesia Dei ferendae sunt, ut quae pugnent cum bonitate Dei," 
 &c. — Prsestantium Virorum Epistolse, No. 210, p. 355. Am- 
 sterdam, 1704. 
 
232 the church's service 
 
 goodness and truth of God, He professes, more- 
 over, that his rule of interpretation is the consent 
 of the ancient Fathers ; 74 and the party and sys- 
 tem of Calvin he mentions with no kind of appro- 
 bation ; calling the one the sect of Zeno," 75 and 
 the other the " fatal dogma of Predestination." 
 
 There is nothing, then, in Overall's tenets which 
 can justify any one in taking his statements in any 
 other than their natural and obvious sense. And 
 when we pass onward to the final settlement of the 
 present Liturgy, a. d. 1662, there is still less 
 reason to doubt that those who finally arranged the 
 words, as at present employed, designed to affirm 
 the reality of baptismal grace. For not only were 
 all the Bishops who conducted the Savoy Con- 
 ference, to use Mr. Goode's phraseology, " of the 
 Laudian party ;" but he allows that it had the 
 majority in the Covocation. But he supposes that 
 he is not bound by the opinions of these divines, 
 which he admits to be hostile to his own ; because 
 the Act of Supremacy was not passed by them, 
 but by Parliament ; and because Parliament did 
 not sanction " the book of Common-Prayer as the 
 book of the convocation of that period," but the 
 book sanctioned by the Act is " the book of Queen 
 Elizabeth, with certain alterations and additions." 
 So much, of course is true, that no new sense 
 
 74 "Tota Prsedestinationis nostra cognitio, primum ex verbo 
 sivinitus revelato in S. S., turn ex sensu et doct.rina antiquorum 
 Patrum sacram doctrinam interprctantium sumenda est, juxta 
 illud Vincentii Lyrinensis," &c. — Id. 
 
 75 " iEgre cedet Zenonia secta moderatis sententiis . . . scd 
 mordicus ad iliud fatale prsedestinationis dogma .... adheerc- 
 scent." — Id. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 233 
 
 was given to those ancient words of the Church, 
 which had been received from the time of Queen 
 Elizabeth, and before it. But how can those who 
 deny the doctrine of baptismal grace receive those 
 "alterations and additions" which are not attri- 
 butable to the age of Elizabeth? Mr. Goode has 
 avowed his dislike of the language employed in 
 the Prayer-Book, " while," he says, "knowing 
 the meaning intended to be affixed to it by those 
 who applied it in our Formularies, I have not the 
 smallest difficulty in accepting it." But what 
 ground has he for the same confidence respecting 
 the intentions of those who added to the Prayer- 
 Book in 1662? Their intention of asserting the 
 reality of baptismal grace is as well-known, as the 
 words are express in which they have asserted it. 
 The service for adult Baptism is to be dated wholly 
 to their times. Can there be the least doubt with 
 what intention they compiled it ? Its words supply 
 one important link in the chain of argument, be- 
 cause they establish, beyond doubt, the Church's 
 opinion, that those who come as devout and well- 
 disposed catechumens partake of Regeneration only 
 by that act of Baptism, whereby they are engrafted 
 into the Body of Christ. Thus is the efficacy of the 
 human agent thrown altogether into the back-ground, 
 and the whole weight of this momentous change is 
 made to rest upon that gift of grace, which enters 
 into the line of humanity through the Mediation of 
 Christ Our Lord. Now this statement of the Ser- 
 vice for baptizing adults, if taken literally, is, of 
 course, inconsistent with Mr. Goode's opinion, 
 that in adults Baptism is only the seal of a bless- 
 ing already possessed, and that no persons are 
 20* 
 
234 
 
 regenerated in Baptism whose regeneration was 
 not commenced before it. And why are not the 
 words of this Service to be taken in their literal 
 sense ? Certainly not from any knowledge of the 
 design of those who composed them. For the 
 compilers were the very parties to whom Mr. 
 Goode imputes a wish to have " introduced vari- 
 ous alterations into our Formularies," with a view 
 of giving more distinct expression to their own 
 sentiments. Mr. Goode protests altogether against 
 the divines, who conducted the Savoy Conference, 
 and throws himself by preference upon the judg- 
 ment of Convocation. But of the three bishops, 
 comprised in its Committee for compiling the form 
 of Adult Baptism, two, Laney and Henchman, 
 had been Savoy Commissioners (the latter, says 
 Baxter, "as high in his principles and resolutions 
 as any of them,") 76 and Griffith the third, 77 though 
 not appointed, had taken part in the Commission. 
 There can be no question, then in what manner 
 they must have regarded the subject. And although 
 Mr. Goode seems to suppose that Convocation 
 was likely to be more favourable to his views than 
 the divines at the Savoy, yet the evidence supplied 
 by its history is wholly adverse to such a sup- 
 position. The requirements of Baxter upon this 
 head were, mainly that the Church should so far 
 relax her doctrine as to allow of that sense, which 
 Mr. Goode would assign to her words. There is 
 much significance, therefore, in his statement that 
 "the new Parliament and Convocation sat down, 
 being constituted of men fitted and devoted to 
 
 76 Life, by Sylvester, Part ii, 363. 77 Baxter's Life, p. 364. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 235 
 
 the Diocesan interest." 73 And their choice of 
 leaders plainly indicated this inclination : for they 
 chose Fearne, an old Chaplain of Charles I., for 
 their first, and afterwards Barwick, one of the 
 Savoy Divines, for their second Prolocutor. Mr. 
 Goode will not judge favourably of the moderation 
 of those "clergy of the Convocation, who con- 
 stantly came to" Peter Heylin " in matters relating 
 to the Church, because he had been himself an 
 ancient clerk in the old convocations." 79 And 
 yet it would not seem that parties ran high, since 
 it is related, "that in this Convocation there were 
 no debates to speak of." 80 
 
 But besides the "addition" of the services for 
 baptizing adults, the Convocation of 1662 be- 
 queathed some most material " alterations" to 
 their successors. And these alterations, though 
 not touching directly on the Divine Decrees, can- 
 not be supposed to have been made with any Cal- 
 vinistic bias ; nor could it be thought that those 
 who made them would be very anxious even to 
 render them compatible with Calvinism. The 
 first was the introduction of the Thanksgiving into 
 the Office for Private Baptism in houses by which 
 the Regeneration of infants is affirmed — even 
 when there are no sponsors ; the second, which 
 is of still greater moment, was the restoration of 
 that prayer for the consecration of the element of 
 water, which had been excluded from King Ed- 
 ward's second Prayer-Book at the instance of 
 Bucer. 
 
 78 Baxters Life, Pt. ii. p. 334. " 9 Heylin's Life, p. xxvi. 
 
 80 Kennett's Register, p. 450. 
 
236 
 
 The first alteration seems to have been ground- 
 ed on a misrepresentation, which the Puritan 
 party had made of the subsequent words of recep- 
 tion ; "Give thy Holy Spirit to this infant, that 
 he, being born again, and being made heir of 
 everlasting salvation," &c. This led them into 
 the error, which has sometimes been made re- 
 specting the Collect for Christmas-Day, of fancying 
 that the child "is now supposed to be regener- 
 andus, not regeneratus ;" to be a candidate, that 
 is, for regeneration ; not one who has been already 
 regenerated. To shut out the possibility of such 
 a cavil, the thanksgiving in question, appears to 
 have been introduced. And it has had the happy 
 effect of shutting out also the Pelagian notion, that 
 the gifts of baptism are conditional upon the ful- 
 filment of those engagements into which sponsors 
 enter, inasmuch as the child's regeneration is not 
 less confidently affirmed, in cases where there are 
 no sponsors. 
 
 The re-insertion of the Prayer of Consecration 
 is still more important. Though Bucer had pro- 
 fessed his accordance with the Lutherans, of whom 
 it was a main doctrine, as Martyr complained, 
 that "they tied the grace of God to Baptism," 
 (vid. p. 228,) yet one point to which he mainly 
 objected in our Baptismal Office, was the Prayer 
 for consecrating the water. 81 His fear was, lest it 
 
 81 " Constat enim ad quam magicam rerum immutationem 
 persuadendam hominibus, istse benedictiones sint detortse." And 
 again, " Quasi Dens debeat his rebus immanentem aliquam im- 
 mittere virtutem." But he admits that " Sacraincnta nostra sunt 
 in usu ; actiones sunt, quibus Dominus peccatorum remissionem 
 suique communionem suis impertit hominibus" &c. — Scripta 
 Auglicana, p. 481. 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 237 
 
 should engender the idea, that into the elements sa 
 themselves there was infused some magical effi- 
 cacy. Whereas, its purpose was not of course to 
 imply, that material elements could ever become 
 efficacious of themselves to the production of spi- 
 ritual results, but that it was God's will to annex 
 a certain spiritual power to a peculiar manner of 
 using certain external elements. This is the idea 
 conveyed by the Homily, when, as a necessary 
 condition of a sacrament, it lays down that it must 
 have a promise " annexed and tied to the visible 
 sign."= 3 The same thing is expressed by Arch- 
 bishop Cranmer, when he says that the Holy Ghost 
 is " sacramentally joined to the water in Bap- 
 tism." 84 The object is to the error, 85 that to sup- 
 pose Sacraments the channel of grace is to sub- 
 ordinate God's Spirit to man's will. For by thus 
 
 82 Mr. Gorham maintains that there is so little danger of this 
 mistake, that " though the more ignorant Papist might attrihute 
 a regenerative work to the very element of water, consecrated to 
 a Sacamental use, yet the intelligent Romanist would doubtless 
 allow, that it was to God giving His blessing to this opus opc- 
 ratum, that its never-failing efficacy must be ascribed." — Ex- 
 amination, Introd. p. 25. Mr. Goode also maintains that the 
 doctrine taught by the formularies of the Church of England, 
 that Baptism is efficacious whenever it is duly administered, is 
 equivalent to the statement of the Church of Rome, that Sa- 
 craments owe their efficacy to the opus operatum, as contra- 
 distinguished from the opus operant is. He says, " To suppose 
 that the spiritual effect always accompanies the outward action, 
 is in fact much the same as to suppose that the spiritual effect is 
 always produced by the outward action, because even in the 
 latter case it is only supposed to take place through Divine in- 
 fluence;" p. 231. 
 
 83 Of Common Prayer and Sacraments, p. 330. 
 
 84 Defence, ii. 9 ; Jenkyns's Cranmer, vol. ii. p. 338. 
 85 This error appears in the fifty-eighth answer of Mr. Gorham, 
 quoted Supra, p. 43. 
 
238 
 
 associating the ordinance with those specific me- 
 dia, which are Divinely appointed, the mind is 
 carried back to the virtue inherent in the man 
 Christ Jesus, which extends through His consti- 
 tuted ordinances to all His members, instead of 
 resting upon the excellence of the doers, by whom 
 the earthly act is either administered or partici- 
 pated. The prayer of Consecration, therefore, 
 is of the utmost importance, not indeed, as in 
 the Eucharist, to the validity of the ordinance, 
 which depends only on the concurrence of certain 
 words and a certain element; but inasmuch as it 
 wholly shuts out the idea that Baptism is only a 
 significant seal and sign of that which God at 
 some other period, either before or after, may be 
 hoped to effect. Whereas the Church's doctrine 
 has ever been that u at the time when God giveth 
 His heavenly grace, He applieth by the hands of 
 His ministers that which betokeneththe same ; not 
 only betokeneth, but, being also accompanied for 
 ever w T ith such power as doth truly work, is in 
 that respect termed God's instrument, a true effi- 
 cient cause of grace ; a cause not in itself, but 
 only by connection of that, which is in itself a 
 cause, namely, God's own strength and power. 
 Sacraments, that is to say, the outward signs in 
 Sacraments, work nothing till they be blessed and 
 sanctified of God. But what is God's heavenly 
 benediction and sanctification, saving only the 
 association of His Spirit. Shall we say that Sacra- 
 ments are like magical signs, if thus they have 
 their effect? Is it magic for God to manifest by 
 things sensible what He doth, and to do by His 
 own most glorious Spirit really what He mani- 
 
NOT DRAWN UP BY CALVINISTS. 239 
 
 festeth in His Sacraments ? The delivery and ad- 
 ministration whereof remaineth in the hands of 
 mortal men, by whom as by personal instruments, 
 God doth apply signs, and with signs inseparably 
 join His Spirit, and through the power of His 
 Spirit work grace." 36 
 
 Whatever, then, may have been Bucer's notion, 
 though he may not have designed to teach any 
 thing contrary to Hooker's statement, but only to 
 guard against an abuse, which at the time was 
 prevalent, the act of Convocation, in restoring 
 that to which he had successfully objected, is a 
 distinct proof that, as members of the English 
 Church, we are not bound to defer to his opinion. 
 For here is a most important item in our service, 
 which was not only inserted without his concur- 
 rence, but restored in spite of his opposition. And 
 let it not be said, that those who made this alter- 
 ation were exceeding their powers, and that 
 they were bound to the principles of that earlier 
 settlement, which had been made under Eliza- 
 beth. For from this obligation they were free, 
 while all subsequent individuals are not only 
 bound to the Prayer-Book in general, but like- 
 wise to the " additions and alterations" which 
 they inserted. For, not to notice their right in con- 
 science to represent the Church, they were freed 
 from legal restraints by a special Commission. 37 
 
 s6 Eccles, Polity, vi. 6, 11. 
 
 87 "• May 31, 1661. It was ordered by His Majesty in Council, 
 that Mr. Attorney-General should forthwith prepare a Commis- 
 sion, to authorize the Convocation to consult of matters relating 
 to the settlement of the Church, and not to insert therein the 
 clause or proviso in the words following, nor any other clause 
 or proviso to the like effect, Provided always, that the said 
 
240 the church's service, etc. 
 
 So that the statements then adopted have the same 
 binding efficacy with any which preceded them. 
 And while their verbal force cannot be evaded, 
 the intentions of those who compiled them cannot 
 be disputed. 
 
 And here, then, we may conclude this chapter 
 with the assertion, that those who compiled the 
 Service Books of the Church of England were not 
 Calvinists. For the three periods of especial inter- 
 est have been severally considered : and while re- 
 specting the Divines of 1662 no such pretence has 
 been alleged, respecting Bishop Overall and Arch- 
 bishop Cranmer none such can be substantiated. 
 
 Canons, Orders, Ordinances, Constitutions, Matters and Things, 
 or any of them so to be considered, consulted and agreed upon 
 as aforesaid, be not contrary or repugnant to the Liturgy estab- 
 lished, or the Rubric in it, or the nine-and-thirty Articles, or 
 any doctrine, order, or ceremonies of the Church of England 
 already established." — Rennet's Register, p. 456. 
 
THE ENGLISH DIVINES, ETC. 241 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE ENGLISH DIVINES ALWAYS MAINTAINED THEIR 
 BELIEF IN THE EFFICACY OF BAPTISMAL GRACE. 
 
 The subject which remains for consideration is 
 the second of Mr. Goode's three assertions — name- 
 ly, that even though the compilers of our Public 
 Formularies cannot be shown to have been Calvin- 
 ists, yet that the prevalence which the Calvinistic 
 Doctrine of Absolute Decrees at one time attained 
 in the English Church, is a sufficient. proof that her 
 Baptismal Offices are not to be taken in that sense 
 which u the expressions evidently favour." In 
 support of this statement, he adduces a variety of 
 extracts, which occupy the larger part of his vol- 
 ume. " No man, holding the system of doctrine 
 called Calvinistic," he says, " can consistently hold 
 that the universal effect of Baptism in Infants is to 
 produce spiritual regeneration. And therefore the 
 proofs already given of the Calvinistic views of our 
 Archbishops, Bishops, and University Professors, 
 are decisive, though indirect evidences of their 
 general doctrine on the subject of Baptism." 
 " While it is impossible to obtain testimonies from 
 many of these divines on the particular subject of 
 the effects of Baptism, from the circumstance of its 
 not having been any where treated of by them, yet 
 21 
 
242 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 the system of doctrine they held is a sufficient proof 
 of the general character of their views." 
 
 Mr. Goode's extracts then may be divided into 
 two classes : those which directly militate against 
 the universal efficacy of Baptism: those which 
 only imply such a Calvinistic bias, as he conceives 
 to be incompatible with its belief. That passages 
 of the former kind may be found in some English 
 writers is generally acknowledged ; but it would 
 be easy to show that this part of the argument is 
 carried to an extent which is wholly indefensible. 
 Let us take, as an instance, the cases of Jewell and 
 Davenant. In Jewell's works occur various di 
 rect statements of the general efficacy of infant 
 Baptism. How does Mr. Goode meet them? He 
 refers to Jewell's assertions of a truth which is 
 universally acknowledged — the necessity, namely, 
 of faith in the adult receiver — and assumes, there- 
 fore, that Jewell must have had some secret condi- 
 tion in his mind, by which his general statements 
 of the efficacy of infant Baptism must be limited. 
 What these conditions are, he leaves to be con- 
 jectured by the reader : " whether we suppose that 
 the seed of faith is implanted in the infant previous 
 to Baptism, or whether we hold that the provision 
 of future faith and repentance avails in the case of 
 an infant, or whatever other theory may he adopted." 
 It is sufficient to reply, that Jewell himself makes 
 no mention of such theories. What evidence is 
 there that he held the strange notion that infants 
 possess a developed reason ; or that he supposed 
 with the Pelagians, that man's desert determines 
 God's election to privileges ? And what general 
 assertion is there which may not be rendered nuga 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 243 
 
 tory, if we are at liberty to explain it, by " what- 
 ever other theory may be adopted ?" 
 
 That Bishop Davenant 1 has been misunderstood 
 by Mr. Goode in one very material particular, has 
 already been noticed ; for Davenant has been 
 shown not to have restricted Baptism, as Mr. 
 Goode supposed, to the children of Christians. 3 
 Again, in his statement of Davenant's views, we 
 meet with the same confusion between actual and 
 habitual faith, which has been already noticed in 
 connexion with the Council of Vienne. Davenant 
 denies that infants can possess actual faith : in 
 their case he observes, " it is enough to say that 
 they have a faith which does not show itself in act, 
 but is included in the habitual principle of grace. 
 For that the Spirit of Christ is able, and is wont 
 to work in them this habitual principle of grace, no 
 reasonable man will deny." And he goes on to 
 observe, that this opinion is not invalidated, be- 
 cause actual faith is not at once exhibited by them ; 
 because their lack of reason is a bar, which delays 
 the effect of the gift bestowed upon them. It is 
 plain, then, that Davenant supposed that some gifc 
 of grace was always bestowed upon infants in Bap- 
 tism ; but that as regarded faith, it was only the 
 seed of its habitual influence, and not the intelli- 
 gent act, of which that age was capable. And that 
 such was his opinion might be substantiated from 
 other parts of his writings. 3 " I remember," says 
 
 1 Margaret, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, a. p. 1609. 
 Bishop of Salisbury, a. t). 1621. " 2 vide p. 93. 
 
 3 " Haec est ilia Adoptio ad regnum coeleste quam omnibus 
 parvulis baptizatis competere libenter agnoscimus." — EpisUla 
 Davenantii, Vindicise Gratix,?. 17. 
 
244 THE ENGLISH DIVINES. 
 
 Hammond, " the learned Bishop of Salisbury, Dr. 
 Davenant, in his Lent Sermon (I think the last he 
 preached before the king,) declared his opinion to 
 be as for universal redemption, so for universal 
 grace within the Church." 4 Davenant had main- 
 tained the same opinion previously at the Council 
 of Dort. 5 Now these views of Davenant's are 
 wholly misconceived by Mr. Goode. He supposes 
 Davenant to mean that some infants possess faith, 
 " qualifying them to derive an immediate salutary 
 effect" from Baptism, by virtue of that grace which 
 " may be given to infants by the Holy Spirit pre- 
 vious to Baptism." Thus would the validity of 
 Baptism be thrown upon the act of the child ; and 
 some infants must be supposed to possess actual 
 faith, of which Davenant rightly declares all to be 
 incapable, lest that seed of grace, which he states 
 to be bestowed upon all, should be thought to be 
 really given to them. And hence issues the sin- 
 gular notion, " that where grace has been previ- 
 ously conferred, there, and there only, the full Bap- 
 tismal blessing is immediately enjoyed ;" as though 
 baptismal grace were withstood by some incapacity 
 on the part of the infant nature, by which anti- 
 baptismal grace was not obstructed. 
 
 Such objections might be urged against many of 
 Mr. Goode's quotations. But to produce them 
 would be a needless trial of the reader's patience. 
 For what would such quotations establish, so long 
 as the language of our Formularies is clear and 
 unequivocal, but that men have given to Our 
 
 4 Hammond's Letter to Sanderson, Works, i. 673. 
 6 Neal's History of the Puritans, part ii. cap. ii. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 245 
 
 Church's words a different sense from that which, 
 by Mr. Goode's confession, " the expressions evi- 
 dently favour ?" But because the Church's words 
 were formerly evaded, must they be evaded for 
 ever? It is needless, therefore, to enter upon the 
 consideration of those passages, in which, as Mr. 
 Goode alleges, the general efficacy of Sacraments is 
 dispu-ted. The other class of extracts, which show 
 merely the Calvinistic tendency of their authors, 
 admit of a different answer. For these quotations 
 establish nothing, unless it can be proved also, that 
 the Calvinism of Elizabeth's reign was the fixed 
 point, round which all other notions were to arrange 
 themselves. Whereas, it will be found on exami- 
 nation, that the Church's declarations were the set- 
 tled basis, and that the theories of Calvin were only 
 admitted, so far as they were not understood to 
 militate with the established principles. This shall 
 be shown in two ways-*-flrst, by adducing the case 
 of those nominal Calvinists, whose Calvinism had 
 never been tested by themselves, and fell to pieces, 
 so soon as it was examined ; secondly, by reference 
 to an instance, in which avowed and deliberate 
 Calvinism did not preclude the most unequivocal 
 assertion of Baptismal Regeneration. 
 
 Since all which the present argument requires, 
 is to show that disbelief in Sacramental grace 
 was not, in fact, involved either by the nominal, 
 nor even by the deliberate adoption of Calvin's 
 theory, it will be sufficient if a few instances are 
 adduced to the contrary. But something must 
 first be said respecting the general course of events 
 at that period. They illustrate the remarkable law, 
 which regulates man's whole history, that no indi- 
 21* 
 

 246 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 vidual mind is possessed of such power and com- 
 prehension, as to exercise a permanent control over 
 the progress of thought. u The bed is shorter than 
 that a man can stretch himself on it ; and the 
 covering narrower than that he can wrap himself 
 in it." If the general laws of morals, or the 
 Church's faith, as it was proclaimed at Nice, are 
 too wide and fixed to be outgrown, it is because 
 the one are dictated by that Divine wisdom, of 
 which natural conscience is the expositor ; and the 
 other was the revealed teaching of that guiding 
 Spirit, which has been pleased to take up its 
 dwelling in the Mystical Body of Christ. It has 
 been otherwise with all human systems ; and in no 
 case more remarkably than in the overthrow of that 
 intellectual empire, which the eloquence and ability 
 of Calvin had established among the Reformed of 
 the Continent. Scarcely had the sixteenth century 
 passed away, before those symptoms of dissatisfac- 
 tion displayed themselves, which have led to the 
 complete renunciation of his authority in the com- 
 munities where it once was absolute. This process 
 was, no doubt, hastened by the revolting character 
 of that tenet of Absolute Reprobation, which is in- 
 separable from his system. At the Synod of Dort, 
 the ruling party complained because the Remon- 
 strants began by directing their attacks against this 
 vulnerable point of the Calvinistic theory. That 
 which was "misliked," was "their urging so 
 much to handle the point of reprobation, and that 
 in the first place." 6 It was said, their " so hotly 
 urging the question of reprobation, was only to ex- 
 
 6 Hale's Letters, p. 94. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 247 
 
 agitate the contra-remonstrants' doctrine." Mr. 
 Goode has avoided all express statements on this 
 point, although it is manifest that his sole ground 
 for supposing that the Divines who followed the 
 Reformation, could not believe in the universality 
 of baptismal grace, is that such an opinion would 
 break that logical chain of doctrine, in which Re- 
 probation is an indispensable link. This deficiency 
 in the completeness of Mr. Goode\s statements, may 
 be supplied out of a writer with whom in his gene- 
 ral argument he strikingly accords, and by whom 
 he has been anticipated in a large number of his 
 quotations — but who speaks on this subject with 
 less caution. " Our learned Divinity Professors in 
 King Edward's days," says Prynne, " are full and 
 copious on this point ; witness Peter Martyr, in his 
 Comment, in Epist. ad Rom. &c. ; witness Dr. 
 Martin Bucer in his Commentary on Romans, &c, 
 and on Ephesians, &c. : whence eminent Dr. Whit- 
 akers, in his Cygneo Cantio, informs us that Peter 
 Martyr and Martin Bucer, of honourable memory, 
 did profess this doctrine of absolute andirrespective 
 Reprobation, in both our famous Universities ; and 
 that our Church (which was most abundantly water- 
 ed with the fountains of these two eminent Divines, 
 in the days of King Edward VI.) did always hold 
 it as the undoubted truth, ever since the restitution 
 of the Gospel to her." 7 
 
 The statements put forward by Prynne, and now 
 insisted upon by Mr. Goode, have their real basis, 
 not in the events which happened in King Edward's 
 reign, during which the Calvinistic points had not 
 
 7 Prynne's " Anti-Arminianism," p. 103. 
 
248 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 become a main subject of controversy, but in the 
 ascendency which Calvinism gained by the return 
 of the Marian exiles. For a time Calvin's Insti- 
 tutes became the text book for our divinity stu- 
 dents ; and it was treason to dispute his authority 
 in the pulpits of our Universities. But here, as on 
 the Continent, the culminating point of the system 
 was its triumph at the Synod of Dort, (a. d. 1618,) 
 which, by revealing its harsher features, proved 
 fatal to its authority. On the Continent the Re- 
 monstrants sunk gradually into Socinianism, while, 
 as Mr. Hallam observes, " the defections" " to the 
 faith of the Catholic Church," " from whatever 
 cause, are numerous in the seventeenth century." 
 He adds that two, more eminent than any who 
 actually joined it, " must be owned to have given 
 signs of wavering, Casaubon and Grotius."^ 
 
 And now it appeared how great was the advan- 
 tage enjoyed by the Church of England, in that she 
 had retained the ancient Sacramental system, and 
 had not broken that chain of continuity, which 
 bound her to the Primitive Church. The system 
 of Calvinism had been merely an extraneous influ- 
 ence, by which she had been infected, and had not 
 formed the basis of her belief; it was capable ot 
 being thrown off therefore like other human inven- 
 tions, while the great principles of the Gospel re- 
 mained untouched. That which arrested Casau- 
 bon's progress was his removal to this country, 
 from which he writes to Heinsius (a. d. 1611,) 
 while Laud was yet almost unknown out of the 
 University ; "I desire, with Melancthon and the 
 Church of England, that the truths of the faith 
 
 8 « Literature of Europe, from 1600 to 1650," c. ii. 12. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 249 
 
 should be brought to us through the channel of 
 Antiquity, from the fountain of Scripture." " There 
 are divines in England, men of admirable learning 
 and piety, such as the Bishop of Ely (Andrews,) 
 the Bishop of Winchester (Bilson,) the Dean of St. 
 Paul's (Overall,) and others: these, just in propor- 
 tion as they are pious and skilled in true doctrine, 
 are ardent lovers of Antiquity. I wish you knew 
 them." 9 
 
 But the course of events in this country cannot 
 be better understood than by the following account, 
 which was given by the celebrated Bishop Sander- 
 son, of the progress of his own mind. It clearly 
 demonstrates how little hold Calvinism had taken 
 of many who nominally acquiesced in it ; and it 
 therefore disproves Mr. Goode's assertion, that Cal- 
 vinistic phraseology was incompatible with a full 
 admission of the Church's statements respecting 
 baptismal grace. The statement occurs in a letter 
 addressed by Sanderson to Hammond, a. d. 1659 ; 
 and which was published by the latter. 
 
 " I shall set out," says Hammond, " with a bare transcript of 
 that, which will need no comment of mine, to render it useful 
 to the reader, in discovering to him the true and sole original of 
 thriving (for some time) of those doctrines among us, and how 
 so many of our Church came to be seasoned with them, and in 
 giving him a but necessary caution for the laying the ground of 
 the Study of Divinity in the writings of the ancient Church, 
 rather than in our modern systems and institutions." 
 
 The following is Sanderson's own statement. 
 
 " When I began to set myself to the study of Divinity as my 
 proper business (which was after I had the degree of Master of 
 Arts, being then newly twenty-one years of age,) [a. d. 1608,] 
 
 9 Pra3stantium Epistolicse Ecclesiastse, Ep. 143. 
 
250 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 the first thing I thought fit for me to do, was to consider well 
 of the Articles of the Church of England, which I had formerly- 
 read over twice or thrice, and whereunto I had subscribed. 
 And because I had then met with some Puritanical pamphlets, 
 written against the Liturgy and Ceremonies, although most of 
 the arguments therein were such as needed no great skill to 
 give satisfactory answers unto, yet for my fuller satisfaction, 
 (the questions being de rebus agendis, and so the more suitable 
 to my proper inclination) I read over with great diligence, and 
 no less delight, that excellent piece of learned Hooker's Eccle- 
 siastical Polity. And I have great cause to-bless God for it, 
 that so I did, not only for that it much both cleared and settled 
 my judgment for ever after in very many weighty points (as of 
 scandal, Christian liberty, obligation of laws, obedience, &c.,) 
 but that it also proved (by his good providence) a good pre- 
 parative to me (that I say not antidote) for the reading of 
 Calvin's Institutions with more caution than perhaps (otherwise) 
 I should have done. For that book was commended to me, as 
 it was generally to all young scholars in those times, as the best 
 and perfectest system of Divinity, and fittest to be laid as a 
 groundwork iri the study of that profession. And, indeed, being 
 so prepared as is said, my expectation was not at all deceived, 
 in the reading of those institutions. I found, so far as I was 
 then able to judge, the method exact, the expression clear, the 
 style grave, equal, and unaffected; his doctrine for the most part 
 conform to St. Augustin's, in a word, the whole work very 
 elaborate, and useful to the Churches of God in a good mea- 
 sure ; and might have been (I verily believe) much more useful, 
 if the honour of his name had not given so much reputation to 
 his very errors, I must acknowledge myself to have reaped 
 great benefit by the reading thereof. But as for the questions 
 of Election, Reprobation, Effectual Grace, Perseverance, &c, 
 I took as little notice of the two first, as of any other thing 
 contained in the book; both because I was always afraid to pry 
 much into those secrets, and because I could not certainly 
 inform myself from his own writings, whether he were a Supra- 
 lapsarian (as most speak him, and he seemeth often to incline 
 much that w r ay,) or a Sublapsarian, as sundry passages in the 
 book seem to import. But giving myself mostly still to the 
 study of moral Divinity (and taking other things upon trust, 
 as they were in a manner generally taught, both in the Schools 
 and Pulpits in both Universities,) I did for many years together 
 acquiesce, without troubling myself any farther about them, in 
 the more commonly received opinions concerning both these 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 251 
 
 two, and the other points depending thereupon. Yet in the 
 Sublapsarian way ever, which seemed to me of the two, the 
 more moderate, rational, and agreeable to the goodness and 
 justice of God : for the rigid Supralapsarian doctrine could 
 never find any entertainment in my thoughts from first to last. 
 But mdcxxv. a Parliament being called, wherein I was chosen 
 one of the clerks of the Convocation for the Diocese of Lincoln, 
 during the continuance of that Parliament (which was about 
 four months as I remember,) there was some expectation that 
 those Arminian points (the only questions almost in agita- 
 tion at that time,") should have been debated by the clergy in 
 that Convocation, which occasioned me (as it did sundry others) 
 being then at some leisure, to endeavour by study and conference 
 to inform myself, as thoroughly and exactly, in the state of those 
 controversies, as I could have opportunity, and as my wit would 
 serve me for it. In order whereunto I made it my first business 
 to take a survey of the several different opinions concerning the 
 ordering of God's Decrees, as to the salvation and damnation of 
 men ; which opinions, the better to represent their differences to 
 the eye, I reduced into schemes or tables. . . . Having all these 
 schemes before my eyes at once, so as I might with ease compare 
 them with one another, and having considered of the conve- 
 niences and inconveniences of each, as well as I could, I soon 
 discerned a necessity of quitting the Sublapsarian way, of which 
 I had a better liking before, as well as the Supralapsarian, which I 
 could never fancy." 10 
 
 Now, it cannot be inferred that persons, who 
 merely acquiesced in this manner in a prevalent 
 theory, might not be firmly attached to those truths, 
 which they learnt from the Formularies of the 
 Church. Still more must this have been the case, 
 when they found that the statements which occur 
 in our baptismal offices, were universally adopted 
 in Primitive times, and had been finally vindicated 
 against the Semi-Pelagians by the Council of 
 Orange. The system, therefore, which they heard 
 
 10 Hammond's " Pacific Discourse of God's Grace and De- 
 crees," Works, i. 669. 
 
252 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 in the schools, was gradually modified by that 
 which they learnt from Scripture and Antiquity. 
 If Mr. Goode had convinced them, that the Abso- 
 lute Decrees of Calvin were incompatible with the 
 free grace of St. Augustin, he would only have 
 hastened their migration from the school of Geneva 
 to that of Hippo. That in this way our English 
 Divinity advanced to a riper judgment, as it gra- 
 dually shook off those fetters, which the genius of 
 Calvin had imposed upon it, appears from the very 
 extracts of Mr. Goode. For he finds the system of 
 Calvinism not only in Abbot and Downame, but in 
 Andrews and Hooker. And this is in fact to con- 
 fute himself. For that which is complained of in 
 the persons whom Mr. Goode defends, is not that 
 they adopt the theories of Calvin, but that they 
 assert themselves to be precluded from receiving 
 the Church's judgment respecting God's promises. 
 If they are deemed unsound Churchmen, it is not 
 for accepting the doctrine of Absolute Decrees, but 
 for rejecting the doctrine of baptismal grace. Now, 
 what countenance can Hooker afford to such a 
 course ? For how could the universality of Sacra- 
 mental grace be more plainly stated than in Book 
 V. of the Ecclesiastical Polity. Here the doctrine 
 of Mediation is fully set forth ; and the Humanity 
 of the Son of God is shown to be the very medium 
 of that grace, whereby He renews His fallen 
 brethren. And this is the central point of the 
 whole controversy. For let this truth be once 
 understood, and children will be seen to be in their 
 degree as competent recipients of the blessing as 
 their elders. For as certainly as infancy can parti- 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 253 
 
 cipate in the corruption of the old Adam, can it be 
 regenerated by the graces of the New. 
 
 But there remains yet clearer proof behind. For 
 not only was the popular language of Calvinism 
 employed, where the system was not received in 
 its rigour ; in cases, therefore, which furnish no 
 presumption against the admission of Sacramental 
 grace ; but baptismal regeneration could not be 
 affirmed in broader terms, nor language which was 
 more directly opposed to Mr. Goode's hypothesis 
 be employed in stating it, than was used by a 
 leading Calvinistic Divine of the age of James I. 
 The Council of Dort has been already referred to, 
 as marking the highest point, which was attained 
 by the Calvinistic party. Among the reputed 
 heads, therefore, of that party, were the English 
 Divines who attended at Dort — not, indeed, ac- 
 cording to Mr. Goode's statement, as " represen- 
 tatives of our Church," but as delegates deputed 
 by the King. One of these was Dr. Samuel 
 Ward, Master of Sidney College, Cambridge, 
 who was appointed Margaret Professor of Divinity 
 three years afterwards. He is cited in Prynne's 
 work against Arminianism as one of the "three 
 famous reverend Divines of especial eminency, 
 note, and credit in our Church." 11 He was a 
 valued correspondent of Usher's, 13 who seems to 
 
 11 Anti-Arminianism, p. 260. 
 
 12 " You have done ine a great pleasure, in communicating unto 
 me my Lord of Salisbury's (Davenant's) and your own determi- 
 nation, touching the efficacy of Baptism in Infants : for it is an 
 obscure point, and such as I desire to be taught in by such as 
 you are, rather than deliver my own opinion thereof." — Usher's 
 Lett, to Dr. Ward; vid. Parr's Life of Usher, No. 159, 
 p. 434. 
 
254 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 have deferred to his powers of reasoning, as much 
 as Ward did to the great acquirements of the 
 Archbishop. He always professed himself op- 
 posed to the Arminian party, 13 and on this account, 
 apparently, was chosen a member of the West- 
 minster Assembly of Divines. If there be any 
 one then, on whose opposition to the universal 
 efficacy of Baptism Mr. Goode could reckon, it 
 would be Dr. Ward. But it will be found not 
 only that Dr. Ward asserted this doctrine, but 
 that he asserted it in that very manner, by which 
 Mr. Goode's hypothesis is most exactly contra- 
 dicted. 
 
 It is well known that the Savoy Divines em- 
 ployed words, which were usual among the 
 Schoolmen, that " God's Sacraments have their 
 effects, where the receiver doth not l ponere obicem^ 
 put any bar against them (which children cannot 
 do") [vid. p. 110.] This was the opinion of 
 those Bishops who were concerned in the com- 
 position of the Form for Adult Baptism, and who 
 also suggested various other alterations, which 
 were adopted by the Convocation of 1662. It is 
 obvious how directly this statement conflicts with 
 the fundamental principle of Mr. Goode's volume, 
 namely, that infants are not all "fit subjects" for 
 Baptism ; but require certain " qualifications" 
 over and above the presence of original sin, 
 which renders grace so needful, and the absence 
 of actual sin, whereby they are unable to oppose 
 it. Against this statement, therefore, of the com- 
 
 13 " He speaks with thankfulness of " the repression of the 
 Arminian Faction.'' — Usher's Lett. No. 108. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 255 
 
 pilers of one of our Baptismal Offices, Mr. Goode 
 takes up arms, and declares it, in words borrowed 
 from Abbot, Bishop of Salisbury, to be a Papis- 
 tical statement, and to form the basis of the doc- 
 trine of the opus operation. Those who agree 
 with the Catechism of the Church of England, are 
 not likely to think more highly than did Bishop 
 Overall, 14 by whom the conclusion of the Cate- 
 chism was penned, of Abbot's authority. But the 
 point to which I call attention is, that Dr. Ward 
 employed this obnoxious form of expression, both 
 in his private writings, and when presiding as 
 Professor in the Divinity Exercises at Cambridge. 
 Mr. Goode closes his list of authorities with Dr. 
 Ward's predecessor, Davenant ; but (while speak- 
 ing of Davenant as " one of the representatives of 
 our Church at the Synod of Dort, . . . whose Cal- 
 vinism will not of course be disputed") he mentions 
 Dr. Ward as " agreeing with Devenant's view, and 
 perhaps carrying it a little further." It would not 
 be inferred from this statement, that Dr. Ward 
 was accustomed to employ that particular mode 
 of expressing this doctrine, against which Mr. 
 Goode so peculiarly protests. Such, however, 
 was the case. In his work on Justification, after 
 
 14 " Audio tractatum quendam Episcopi nunc Sarisburiensis, 
 fratris Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis, modo sub prado esse, contra 
 Arminianos et diatribam Thompsoni ; nee multum miror, cum 
 Perkinsium cum suo reformat*) Catholico prius defenderit. 
 Utinam res theologicas et quaestiones de fide Christiana, non 
 ex studiis partium, et priviatis opiniojiibus aut affectibus, sed ex 
 certo verbo Dei et consensu veteris Ecclesiae tractaremus et 
 definiremus, majorem spem concordiaj simul et veritatis Evan- 
 gel ica; teneremus." — Overall to Grotius, Epistolcs Preestan- 
 tium Yirorum, No, 295. 
 
256 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 defining Sacraments to be signs of grace, but 
 stating that they are unprofitable, unless there 
 be fitness on the part of the receiver, he adds; 
 " from this rule infants are to be excepted, in 
 whose Baptism there needs no previous disposition 
 on the part of the receiver. For the circum- 
 stance of their interposing no bar by any voluntary 
 act, is their sufficient qualification for obtaining 
 the effect of Baptism." 15 But the subject is 
 treated of at length in two " Determinations" 
 pronounced in the Divinity Schools at Cam- 
 bridge. And these are of the more interest in the 
 present inquiry, because, in transmitting them to 
 Usher (with a letter, a part of which is quoted 
 by Mr. Goode,) Dr. Ward states, that he had dis- 
 cussed the question of " the efficacy of Baptism in 
 infants," with Bishop Davenant, and that they 
 agreed that the full admission of this truth was 
 not inconsistent with that view of the question of 
 Perseverance, which they both accepted. Now 
 how is Mr. Goode to reconcile these statements ? 
 On the one hand, we are told that the doctrine of 
 the Schoolmen, that Baptismal grace profits in- 
 fants, because they are incapable of opposing a 
 bar to its efficacy, is absolutely to be rejected as 
 " Papisticum illud pronunciatum ;" and therefore 
 it must be as much without the "limit laid down 
 by Our Church on the doctrine of the Sacra- 
 ments," as the opinion (for which Mr. Goode ar- 
 raigns the Bishop of Exeter in no very courteous 
 terms,) " that on the subject of Baptism wc are 
 
 ,3 "Utobicem nullum ponant actu voluntario." — Traclcius 
 dc Justijicalionc cap. xxx. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 257 
 
 agreed with Rome." But, on the other hand, 
 Bishop Davenant is a person " whose Calvinism 
 will not be disputed ;" and we find Dr. Ward, 
 also a Calvinist, and a delegate at Dort, " agree- 
 ing with Bishop Davenant's view, and perhaps 
 carrying it a little further." But the view of 
 Dr. Ward is the very statement which is so abso- 
 lutely incompatible with Mr. Goode's interpreta- 
 tion of our Baptismal Offices. " Infants place no 
 Dar. On them, therefore, we say that Sacraments 
 infallibly confer grace." 16 How utterly ground- 
 less, then, is Mr. Goode's confidence, even were 
 the fact such as he supposes, that if it should 
 appear that the doctrine of the Reformers "was, 
 in the most important points, what is now called 
 Calvinistic, there is, or ought to be, an end to the 
 controversy as to the interpretation they intended 
 to be given to our Formularies as respects Bap- 
 tism." ' 
 
 If Mr. Goode was aware of the testimony 
 which is thus given against him by his own wit- 
 nesses, he must have felt that he was treading 
 upon precarious ground. And it seems unlikely 
 that it had escaped his notice, since he refers to 
 the volume 17 in which Dr. Ward's two Deter- 
 minations originally appeared. They were sub- 
 
 16 " Non ponunt obiccm parvuli. Illis ergo dicimus sacra- 
 menta infallibiliter conferre gratiam." — Samuelis Wardi Deter- 
 minat ion es Theologies:. 
 
 17 " Vindicia; Gratis Sacramentalis duobus Tractatulis com- 
 prehensffi — 1. T)e Erficacia Sacramentorum in gcnere. 2. De 
 efficacia Baptismi quantum ad Parvulos. Quibus praefigitur 
 Epistola Reverendiss. Patris et Prasulis dignissirni Joan. 
 Davenantii, nuper Episcopi Sarisbur. Argumenti non dissimilis." 
 —Op, et Studio, T. B. S. Th. B. London. 1650, 12mo. 
 
 oo* 
 
258 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 sequently published with Dr. Ward's other works, 
 A. d. 1658, by his pupil and namesake, Seth 
 Ward, afterwards Bishop of Salisbury. But 
 these two Determinations had been printed, a. d. 
 1650, by Thomas Bedford, whose exercises in 
 the Divinity School, a. d. 1629, had given occa- 
 sion to them. Bedford, as it appears from his 
 preface, had suggested two sets of questions, of 
 which Dr. Ward, for reasons unknown to him, 
 selected those which had reference to the validity 
 of Sacraments. We learn from Ward's own 
 statement to Usher, 18 that the choice did not 
 really originate with him ; he was very loath the 
 question should be brought upon the Commence- 
 ment-Stage ; but he was overborne by the im- 
 portunity of the Answerer, and by the authority 
 of the Vice-Chancellor, and "the major part of 
 the Doctors." There were those, it seems, who 
 thought with Mr. Goode, that this question would 
 " impugn the doctrine of Perseverance by an un- 
 deniable argument." So thought Bedford him- 
 self, as he stated to the Divinity Professor. But 
 Ward, as he tells Usher, had " heretofore thought 
 upon this point ; and my Lord of Sarum, and 
 myself, at Dort, had speech of it, when we signi- 
 fied in our judgment, that the case of infants was 
 not appertaining to the question of Perseverance." 
 He therefore told Bedford that the case of infants 
 had nothing to do with the question of Final 
 Perseverance, adding "here is a letter, which I 
 lately received on this subject from the learned 
 and reverend Bishop of Salisbury." 
 
 19 Parr's « Life of Usher," Lett. 160, p. 438. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 259 
 
 To this circumstance probably we owe the pre- 
 servation of Davenant's letter. A copy of it was 
 kept by Bedford, which many years afterwards he 
 was recommended to print by Archbishop Usher. 
 Dr. Ward was by this time dead. Usher took 
 this opportunity of making public the two " De- 
 terminations," and a " Vindication," 19 which 
 Ward had at the time transmitted to him. So 
 that the work supplies us with the judgment of 
 three leading men of the Calvinistic party, respect- 
 ing the fundamental principle of Mr. Goode's 
 book. Bishop Davenant, one of the delegates at 
 Dort, " whose Calvinism will not be disputed," 
 writes a letter to Ward, to show that it is not 
 true, as Mr. Goode supposes, that "the Cal- 
 vinistic views of our Bishops are decisive evi- 
 dences of their general doctrine on the subject 
 of Baptism." Ward, another delegate at Dort, 
 agrees with him : " that the case of infants was 
 not appertaining to the question of Perseverance." 
 And Archbishop Usher, one of the most respected 
 authorities which Calvinists are accustomed to 
 lay claim to, contributes to the publication of 
 their decision. 
 
 The reader will see that on these facts it would 
 not be difficult to found a charge of disingenuous 
 conduct against Mr. Goode. Why not tell his 
 readers plainly the purpose of Davenant's letter? 
 Why not state more fully the sentiments of Dr. 
 
 19 It seems that this Vindication consisted of papers which 
 passed hetvveen Ward and Gataker. Upon the appearance of 
 Bedford's work, Gataker published both Ward's Thesis (a. v. 
 1652) and Davenant's Letter (a. d. 1651,) with his own 
 stnetures. 
 
260 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 Ward, instead of saying that he " agreed with 
 Davenant's view, perhaps carrying it a little 
 further?" I mention the matter, only lest I 
 should be supposed to imply such an imputa- 
 tion. 20 For I feel a full persuasion, that Mr. 
 Goode has not estimated the force of this evi- 
 dence, in consequence of that false position which 
 he has assumed. He has set out with the im- 
 pression that the Church of England was founded 
 about three hundred years ago ; its fundamental 
 principles being certain abstract dicta respecting 
 God's dealings with mankind, which Calvin and 
 other able men had discovered by an attentive 
 study of the text of Scripture. He felt confident, 
 therefore, that so long as he kept within the 
 logical consequences of Calvin's system, he could 
 not possibly misunderstand our leading writers. 
 And no doubt this would have been a perfectly 
 safe mode of proceeding, provided he had built 
 his opinions on the broad ground of the ancient 
 Church ; or supposing his inquiries had been 
 confined within the narrow limits of some strictly 
 Calvinistic Confession. But the principle fails, 
 so soon as it is applied to a portion of that 
 Church Catholic, which was founded by Our 
 Lord and His Apostles. Its writers may have 
 been partially infected by the contagion of 
 modern opinions, but they could not shake off 
 
 20 " Baro's conduct," says Mr. Goode, "seems to me to have 
 been what we should now call very Tractarian, that is, tho- 
 roughly disingenuous." Surely Mr. Goode does not act wise!? 
 iu throwing out imputations of this sort. The rules of Chris- 
 tian charity should lead us to hope that our opponents may be 
 honest as well as ourselves. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 261 
 
 their allegiance to the Confessions and Offices of 
 the Primitive Church. The consent of the 
 Catholic Fathers had been formally recognized 
 by Convocation, a. d. 1571, as the standard of 
 Scriptural exposition. Now these circumstances 
 led Davenant and Ward, as well as various 
 others to whom Mr. Goode refers, into results 
 which, upon his theory, must seem wholly im- 
 possible. 
 
 There were three especial causes which con- 
 tributed to produce this effect. The first was the 
 repulsive nature of the doctrine of Absolute Repro- 
 bation; from which the Calvinistic system cannot 
 really be dissociated. And the case of infants is 
 exactly that, in which its harshness is most 
 striking. It was plainly a great relief, therefore, 
 to be able to say with Davenant, " this is that 
 adoption to the kingdom of Heaven, which we 
 willingly acknowledge is afforded to all baptized 
 infants." 21 This feeling was rendered still 
 stronger, when men came to compare the Cal- 
 vinistic dogma of the Reprobation of some in- 
 fants, which the Church's declaration (before the 
 Savoy Conference,) " that children being bap- 
 tized, have all things necessary for their salva- 
 tion, and be undoubtedly saved." When Ward 
 quoted these words, Gataker objected that the 
 certainty with which the Church speaks of the 
 salvation of baptized infants is not exactly 
 affirmed to be attributable to the virtue of Bap- 
 tism (ex vi Baptismi.) Ward answers; "but 
 Our Church plainly implies this, although it does 
 
 21 Lett, to Ward. Vind. Grat. Sac'p. 17. 
 
262 
 
 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 not state it in express words. Why, then, may 
 we not say that this work is brought about by the 
 efficacy of Baptism as its instrumental cause, as by 
 the sacrifice of Christ as its principal one P" 22 
 
 To these circumstances was added a third : the 
 reference made to the judgment of Antiquity ; 
 and its unequivocal witness to the belief, that 
 some real gift of grace is always bestowed upon 
 infants in Baptism. To this circumstance Ward 
 directly refers in his letter to Usher ; and Dave- 
 nant quotes as his authority the statement of St. 
 Austin : " the Holy Spirit dwells in baptized in- 
 fants, although they know it not." 23 Now, such 
 arguments were enough to show that the doctrine 
 of Reprobation ought not to be applied in the 
 case of infants, even though it was supposed to 
 be tenable in the case of adults. And let this 
 point of the Reprobation of infants be abandoned, 
 and (so far as concerns infant Baptism) men 
 might receive the whole doctrine of baptismal 
 grace. For since Calvin's system supposed God 
 to adopt the elect when He pleased, He might 
 adopt them in Baptism as well as at any other 
 season. Abandon the idea that any infants were 
 excluded by arbitrary sentence, and why should 
 not all be adopted, who were baptized ? It had 
 been held, as has been shown, in the Ancient 
 Church, that God's dealings with men are the 
 counterpart of His Decrees ; but that those deal- 
 ings might be looked at as regarded the gift of 
 grace, or as regarded its employment. The ten- 
 dency of Calvin's teaching was to confuse the 
 
 22 Vindiciae Gratne, p. 183. 23 Vindiciie Gratis, p. 10. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 263 
 
 scriptural statements, which express these two 
 relations of the Divine Economy ; and thus to 
 peril the responsibility of man. But on one point 
 the Ancient Church was fully agreed with him ; 
 that as regarded the gift of grace, its sole cause 
 was the Divine mercy, and not in any respect 
 that prevision of future excellence, which undis- 
 cerning interpreters have supposed to be the key 
 to our baptismal offices. It will be obvious then 
 how easy it was for men, who yet retained some 
 Calvinistic prejudices, to adopt, as regarded the 
 case of infants, the more liberal system of the 
 Ancient Church. For in respect to the ground 
 of election the two systems were agreed, and all 
 which it was necessary to lop off, was the offen- 
 sive tenet of infant Reprobation. 
 
 Thus it came to pass, then, that even those who 
 had been delegates at Dort, and whom the bitter 
 Anti-Arminian Prynne refers to as oracles, adopted 
 views, which Mr. Goode thinks it impossible to 
 attribute to any Calvinist. As they did not impugn 
 Calvin's system of interpretation, they were per- 
 plexed, as Ward states, at finding so little Scriptu- 
 ral authority for their teaching ; but they could not 
 shut their eyes to consequences, which followed 
 from the general tenor of God's Word, and to 
 which such unequivocal witness was borne by the 
 Universal Church, and by the Church of England. 
 Had it not been from deference for Calvin's system, 
 Ward needed not have said, " touching the efficacy 
 of Baptism in infants, I do acknowledge it a point, 
 in which the Scriptures are sparing :" but he adds, 
 " howsoever the Scripture speaks sparingly, yet 
 there are general grounds, from the nature of Sacra- 
 

 264 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 ments, which may serve to inform and direct our 
 judgments herein. Again, I considered the perpe- 
 tual Tradition of the Church in no way to be slight- 
 ed, where it doth not cross the Scripture, but is 
 consonant to general grounds contained in them." 24 
 The point of real moment, however, is the unequi- 
 vocal manner in which they express the judgment, 
 to which these grounds conducted them. Some ex- 
 tracts from Dr. Ward's statements respecting the 
 efficacy of infant Baptism are added in an Appen- 
 dix, not as a complete view of the subject which 
 they treat, but as showing that a theoretical admis- 
 sion of Calvin's doctrine of Decrees is not incom- 
 patible with a belief in baptismal grace. Nor are 
 Davenant's words much less decisive. He affirms 
 that in Baptism u Infants are translated out of the 
 old Adam, and incorporated into the New." " So 
 soon as the guilt which he had contracted in the 
 first Adam is removed from an infant., he is number- 
 ed ipso facto in the family of the second Adam." 25 
 And this is a change, which he speaks of as befall- 
 ing " all baptized infants." 26 And the following 
 passage from his letter to Ward leaves scarcely any 
 thing to desire. After stating that the sanctification 
 of baptized infants depends chiefly on the remission 
 of original sin, he adds: "Although I would not 
 deny that they are holy or sanctified on other 
 grounds also, as for example, because they are de- 
 dicated to the Holy Trinity ; for to be dedicated to 
 Gcd is in some sort to be sanctified : because they 
 are sprinkled with the sacred blood of Christ, for 
 the purpose of obtaining the remission of the sin, 
 
 24 Usher's Life, p. 438. 25 Vindiciae Gratis, p. 215. 26 Id. p. 17. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 265 
 
 which dwells in them ; because they have the Holy 
 Spirit dwelling in them, though not like adults by 
 faith, yet in some secret manner to us unknown. 
 Whence Augustin says, \ in baptized infants, al- 
 though they know it not, the Holy Spirit dwells.' 
 But by the inhabitation of so divine and sacred a 
 guest, the dwelling cannot but receive such sancti- 
 fication as its condition admits of. Finally, they 
 may justly be called holy and sanctified, although 
 they receive neither the acts or habits of faith, jus- 
 tice, nor infused grace, on account of the Author of 
 Sanctity, who works in them, in some unspeakable 
 manner, whatever is required of such as they are, 
 in order that they may be esteemed holy. What 
 this work is in its nature, let those explain who un- 
 derstand it : I confess that I understand it not." 27 
 
 The above passage will seem to most readers a 
 decisive argument against Mr. Goode's opinion, that 
 Bishop Davenant u held that spiritual regeneration 
 in its full and proper sense is not bestowed at Bap- 
 tism." But the evidence will not be complete, un- 
 less it is shown how it happens that he supposes 
 himself to be really borne out by Davenant's opi- 
 nion. For such an inquiry will make it appear, not 
 only that this divine did not accord with him in the 
 essential points of the case, but that all who maintain- 
 ed those positions which were admitted by Dave- 
 nant, and were enforced by the laws of the Church 
 of England, could not fail to be directly opposed to 
 him. Now it is needful to state in the first place 
 (that which Mr. Goode has wholly misconceived,) 
 what is the fundamental point of difference between 
 
 27 Vindicice Gratiae, p. 16. 
 
266 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 him and his antagonists. " The great and all- 
 important point to be contended for," he says, " is 
 that an adult is not necessarily in a state of spiritual 
 regeneration, because he was baptized as an infant ; 
 that is, that such spiritual regeneration as is neces- 
 sary for an adult, is not always conferred upon in- 
 fants when they are baptized." Now this is so far 
 from being the real point at issue, that the first of 
 these propositions is affirmed by no one. The affir- 
 mation of baptismal regeneration has no tendency 
 to lead men to deny that " after we have received 
 the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given." 
 The only parties to whom this error is attri- 
 buted are the Calvinists ; and it is singular that 
 Mr. Goode should at once deny that a Calvinist can 
 hold baptismal regeneration, and yet charge upon 
 baptismal regeneration the very error, which is cha- 
 racteristic of Calvinism. Whereas, in truth, no ad- 
 vocate for baptismal regeneration need assert more 
 than is stated by St Paul: " Know ye not, how 
 that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates ?" 
 And as to the second proposition which is insisted 
 upon by Mr. Goode, it is universally admitted that 
 "Baptism doth challenge to itself but the inchoation 
 of those graces, the consummation whereof depend- 
 eth on mysteries ensuing." The only thing which 
 Mr. Goode can allege, as giving a colour to his 
 statements, is that those who have been baptized 
 are, or ought to be, reminded that if any man defile 
 the temple of God, him will God destroy. They 
 should be exhorted therefore to thank God for call- 
 ing them " to this state of salvation," and to pray 
 for grace that they may u continue in the same" to 
 their lives' end. They should be taught that " re- 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 267 
 
 novation" is not, as Mr. Goode represents, " the 
 most important part of regeneration ;" because how- 
 ever necessary the exertions of men, the most mo- 
 mentous point is the communication of that Divine 
 seed, whereby those who are " born in sin" are 
 made " children of grace." Hence they may learn 
 that the want of that " good fruit," the absence of 
 which is so often to be regretted, is to be attributed 
 to the unkindliness of the stony soil, not to the de- 
 nial of that seed which is designed to fecundate it. 
 The real point at issue therefore, is not whether all 
 who have been baptized attain these results (a 
 thing which none affirm,) but whether such a gift 
 was originally bestowed upon them. Now this 
 turns on the fact, whether all infants are fit candi- 
 cates for the blessings of Baptism or no. 28 And if 
 it be necessary to carry the question higher, that 
 into which it resolves itself is, whether those gifts 
 of grace which the Son of God bestows through His 
 Mediation are capable of benefiting every age : 
 whether all who draw corruption from the old 
 Adam, are capable of the spiritual indwelling of the 
 New. And this will be found to involve a still 
 further question, whether those spiritual blessings, 
 which are promised by God in Holy Scripture, are 
 all bestowed through the Mediation of Christ, or 
 whether there exists any other declared channel 
 through which Divine gifts are bestowed upon men. 
 Taking these, then, as the main points of differ- 
 ence between Mr. Goode and his opponents, with 
 
 28 Mr. Goode states the essential point of his own system to 
 be a denial of the universal worthiness of infants for Baptism. 
 He puts forth as •* the grand cause of the mistakes'' of his oppo- 
 nents, that there must be " qualifications in infants for enjoying 
 that blessing." 
 
268 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 which does Bishop Davenant really agree? Mr. 
 Goode alleges, that the system of Davenant is 
 separated from his own by points iC comparatively 
 of little moment." He calls Davenant's notion 
 that of " an infantine regeneration," and declares 
 it to be " clearly maintainable in our Church." 
 It must obviously be compatible, then, with his 
 own main position — namely, that a difference exists 
 in infants; that some are qualified recipients of 
 baptismal grace, while others are incapable of 
 receiving it. Now, upon what does this capacity 
 or incapacity of the infant depend ? If it were an 
 adult, Mr. Goode might say that it depended upon 
 its faith. This would lead to another question ; 
 but since the infant neither has faith, nor can have 
 it, we may return to the former one. On what, 
 then, does it depend, that some infants are qualified 
 recipients of the pardoning grace bestowed in Bap- 
 tism, others not so? The notion of a gift implies 
 two parties, and we may look either to Him who 
 gives, or him who receives it. Does the discrepancy 
 arise from an absolute Decree passed by Almighty 
 God, bestowing a capacity upon some infants, of 
 which others are not made partakers ? This would 
 be to admit the doctrine of Reprobation in its harshest 
 form ; for it would be to recognize an absolute sen- 
 tence, from which, therefore, the children of Chris- 
 tian parents would not be exempted any more than 
 others. From such a conclusion Mr. Goode revolts. 
 Such children, he says, speaking of those devout 
 persons " as infants," are " acceptable in the eye of 
 God." This plainly throws us on the other side of 
 the alternative, as supplying the reason why some 
 children are to be discriminated from others. For it 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 269 
 
 is to renounce the idea of such an absolute Decree, 
 as is based solely on the sovereignty of God. 
 
 We turn then to the receiver of the gift, and ask 
 what there is in his condition or circumstances, on 
 which his qualification can be built ? Now the 
 infant's condition can plainly supply no qualifica- 
 tion, by which one infant can be discriminated 
 from another. Every child of Adam is born a 
 child of wrath ; he can in himself merit nothing. 
 And even the provision of future faith and repent- 
 ance (to which Mr. Goode and others frequently 
 refer as a not improbable qualification for baptis- 
 mal fitness,) has been shown to be a consideration 
 which none but Pelagians can consistently adduce. 
 There remains nothing, then, but the child's cir- 
 cumstances. And what circumstances can there 
 be in an infant's history, except the accidents of 
 his birth ? To ask what are the peculiar circum- 
 stances of the infant, is only to ask of what parents 
 he is born. So that this is the qualification to 
 which we ultimately come, as the only one, except 
 an Absolute Decree, which can consistently be 
 adduced. This it is, accordingly, which Mr. 
 Goode adduces. " Many might be inclined to 
 think," he says, " that all infants of a true believer 
 receive in Baptism a spiritual blessing." On this, 
 then, he rests that theory of " infantine regenera- 
 tion," which he attributes to Davenant ; and it is 
 plain, in the nature of the case, that if any bless- 
 ing is supposed to accrue from Baptism, there re- 
 mains no other qualification which can be referred 
 to, so soon as the theory of Reprobation has been 
 abandoned. 
 
 Now what is the real nature of this system, 
 2T 
 
270 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 which Mr. Goode tells us, falls clearly within the 
 limits of a Churchman's belief? "The faith of 
 the parent is," he says, " so far as concerns ori- 
 ginal sin, mercifully reckoned by God as imput- 
 able to the infant." And he adds, "if we can 
 justly call the children of every true believer 
 holy, we can as justly, after they have received 
 the seal of the covenant in Baptism, call them 
 regenerate." Mr. Goode would seem to ascribe 
 that Holiness, which St. Paul attributes to the in- 
 fants of Christians, to something which they have 
 by birth, and not, as did the ancient 29 interpreters 
 of St. Paul's words (1 Cor. vii. 14,) to that holi- 
 ness which they gain by Baptism. But supposing 
 this interpretation to be admitted in the greatest 
 latitude of which it is susceptible, " it is yet ob- 
 vious," as St. Austin maintained against Pelagius, 
 by whom this view of the passage was adopted, 
 " that whatever be meant by St. Paul's word 
 "holy," it cannot refer to the making children 
 Christians, nor to the remission of their sins, un- 
 less they are admitted among the faithful by the 
 institution of Christ — by His Church and Sacra- 
 ments." 30 No limit can be assigned, of course, 
 to that infinite mercy of God, which may, if lie 
 wills, be extended to all children : but in this 
 place we are concerned only with His revealed 
 will — with the Christian covenant. In what way 
 is it then, that within the revealed Kingdom of 
 grace, "children are so far interested in their 
 
 20 Wall on Infant Baptism, Part i. c. 19, vol. i. p. 386. Oxf. 
 1844. Vide also the fourth of Hammond's Six Queries. 
 30 St. Aug. quoted hy Wall, p. 3S5. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 271 
 
 parents' faith, that," as Mr. Goode affirms, " they 
 may be reckoned by us, as infants, acceptable in 
 the eye of God" — so that " the faith of the parent 
 is accepted on behalf of the child, as giving it a 
 title to Baptism ?" 
 
 Now in what manner are children allied to 
 their parents ? Are they really one with them or 
 no ? They are surely separate beings, with an 
 individuality of their own, in which their parents 
 have no part. Their parents may be bound to 
 them by sympathy ; by identity they cannot. The 
 children are near to them ; but not themselves. 
 Else what would be the condition of infants whose 
 parents are removed by death i It follows that 
 though the faith of the parents may lead them to 
 do many acts, by which the condition of the child- 
 ren may be effected, yet that the faith of the 
 parent cannot be actually imputed to the child. 
 The parent has by God's law a certain authority 
 over the child, and this involves various coercive 
 acts, by which the child's destiny is largely af- 
 fected. But this is wholly different from any 
 mystical transfusion of the one into the other. The 
 parent may bring his child in his arms to the 
 font, but no exercise of his volition will put mo- 
 tion into the child's limbs and enable it to walk 
 there. So that the two beings remain wholly 
 distinct : "the son shall not bear the iniquity of 
 the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity 
 of the son." There is One Only Partaker of man's 
 nature, whose perfect merits are capable of over- 
 flowing, so as to supply the deficiencies of His 
 brethren. And specific means have been or- 
 dained — namely, his Holy Sacraments, whereby 
 
212 THE ENGLISH DIVINES. 
 
 His sanctified Manhood may be transfused into 
 all members of His Mystical Body. To attribute 
 the same thing to every devout parent, to imagine 
 that his faith and devotion is so efficacious that 
 " the faith of the parent" may be " reckoned by 
 God as imputable to the infant," is to make every 
 Christian parent a Mediator between God and 
 man. It is something distinct from the assertion, 
 which none deny, that the parent's outward acts 
 affect the condition of his child : for it is to sup- 
 pose an influence independent of those outward 
 acts, whereby men are naturally able to benefit 
 one another. It is to assert that there exists two 
 recognized means of salvation, one through that 
 gift of saving grace, which Christ bestows upon 
 those who by their own act are joined to him, the 
 other through that faith of parents, which is imput- 
 able to their children. The common objection 
 to the Invocation of Saints applies, therefore, with 
 tenfold force to this system of doctrine. Without 
 entering upon a subject foreign to the present in- 
 quiry, it is sufficient to say that the Invocation of 
 Saints is defended by those who practise it, on 
 the ground that their advocacy is not irrespective 
 of Our Lord's Mediation, but is built upon it. 
 If the Saints were supposed to be mediators be- 
 tween God and man, independently of the One 
 Mediator by whom God and man are truly united, 
 its very defenders admit that the practice would 
 be unjustifiable. Rut the doctrine before us is di- 
 rectly opposed to Christ's Mediation, because it 
 does not profess merely to employ, but to super- 
 sede it. A mode of Union with Christ having been 
 provided in Holy Baptism, it steps in and denies 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 273 
 
 its validity, unless children have first been brought 
 near to God through the excellence of their pa- 
 rents. The primary sanctification of Infants can- 
 not be based therefore on the Mediation of Christ, 
 because they are not competent subjects for His 
 Mediation until it has been effected. Unless they 
 have first obtained access to God through the in- 
 tervention of the earthly mediators, the influence 
 of that Heavenly Mediator cannot avail them. 
 So that not only is something added to the Christ- 
 ian system, but a new system is substituted in its 
 place. 
 
 Such is the opinion which Mr. Goode in effect 
 attributes to Davenant, and which he affirms to 
 be " clearly maintainable in our Church." No 
 doubt he is far from designing to countenance so 
 fatal a heresy, any more than he intends to sanc- 
 tion Pelagianism, by representing the gifts of grace 
 as contingent on the prevision of future excellence. 
 But since the system of Sacraments is the real 
 mean whereby the Mediation of Christ Our Lord 
 has its effect, these errors are the invariable and 
 necessary effect of denying the efficacy of baptis- 
 mal grace. Ask at Geneva and at Boston, whe- 
 ther such is not the case. And even those who do 
 not discern this as an intellectual consequence, 
 ought at least to profit by the lessons of experience. 
 For nothing is more certain than that the gradual 
 progress of societies is the true exponent of the 
 principles and opinions upon which they are built. 
 Individuals may admit a theory for years without 
 following it into its legitimate consequences ; but 
 communities are controlled by laws, not less in- 
 exorable than those of physical nature, and cannot 
 
274 THE ENGLISH DIVINES. 
 
 admit principles, without accepting their logical 
 results. Now since Sacraments are our appointed 
 means of union with the Humanity of Christ, and 
 since it is through His human nature that He dis- 
 charges that work of Mediation, whereby He is 
 the One only revealed channel of intercourse be- 
 tween God and man, those who deny or under- 
 value these means of access, must needs appease 
 the lono-in^s of their nature through some other 
 method of approach. 
 
 It is wholly without ground, however, that Mr. 
 Goode attributes such a theory to Davenant. This 
 may be shown by referring to that characteristic 
 feature in Mr. Goode's own system — namely, that 
 the benefits of Baptism are not supposed by him 
 to be offered to all infants, but only to those who 
 have certain qualifications. Since these qualifica- 
 tions cannot be found in the infant itself, Mr. 
 Goode, we have seen, is compelled to seek for 
 them in its parents. Unless infants are first par- 
 takers of a Divine gift through the intervention 
 of their parents, they are not qualified, he says, to 
 receive that Gfift of a new nature which is bestowed 
 upon all members of His Body through the Me- 
 diation of Christ. Baptism, that is, does not make 
 any persons holy, whom it does not find so. The 
 presence of original sin, which renders it neces- 
 sary ; and the absence of actual sin, which pre- 
 cludes the opposition of the responsible principle 
 — these are not sufficient qualifications for Baptism, 
 since these all children possess; but they must 
 first be rendered holy by the faith of their parents, 
 and then they may be brought to Christ. Now, 
 this view of things is so far identical with that of 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 275 
 
 the Anabaptists, that if Mr. Goode differs from 
 them in maintaining that the children of devout 
 Christians ought to be baptized, he agrees with 
 them in thinking that all other children ought not. 
 For " those who think themselves bound to bap- 
 tize children only by virtue of the parent's right," 
 says Bishop Stillingfleet, " must run into many- 
 perplexing scruples about baptizing children, and 
 be forced to exclude the far greater number of 
 those that are offered." 31 But whatever may be 
 Mr. Goode's mode of reconciling it with his prac- 
 tice, he puts forward this principle repeatedly, as 
 one which in theory cannot be disputed. His 
 whole opinions respecting Baptism are based on 
 the supposition, that " not all infants, even in the 
 sight of men, can be considered as fit subjects for 
 that holy rite." And this point he supposes must 
 be conceded by all who agree with him; " other- 
 wise" he says, "our system of theology is thrown 
 into letter confusion." And here, therefore, Mr. 
 Goode's system comes into direct collision with 
 that of Davenant, since Davenant was one of 
 those divines who gave judgment at the Council 
 of Dort, that the " children of ethnic parents 
 ought to be baptized." And herein he did but ex- 
 press the same judgment, which had been pro- 
 nounced by the whole English Church, a. d. 1604, 
 through its Convocation. For at the very period, 
 when Mr. Goode alleges Calvinism to have been 
 so absolutely predominant (the first year of James 
 I.,) were passed those Canons — the twenty-ninlh 
 forbidding a " parent to act a Godfather for his own 
 
 31 Unreasonableness of Separation, Part iii. 36, 3. 
 
276 THE ENGLISH DIVINES 
 
 child," and the sixty-eighth enjoining that ministers 
 should "not refuse to christen" — by which the 
 Church gave a practical proof that whatever theo- 
 ries might prevail respecting God's Decrees, there 
 was no intention of surrendering the ancient belief in 
 the validity of Sacraments. Now, it has been often 
 observed that the Canons of 1604 were not the pub- 
 lication of a new law, but only an arrangement and 
 ratification of those usages, which were previously 
 in existence. And of this the instance before us is 
 an example. For our Church's chief advocate in 
 the time of Elizabeth defends her for not adopting 
 that course, which Mr. Goode confesses on his 
 theory to be absolutely essential. And he defends 
 her by pointing out the very inconvenience which 
 this system has been shown to involve — namely, 
 that it would attribute to parents that office of Me- 
 diation, which belongs only to Christ. "It is not 
 the virtue of our parents, nor the faith of any other, 
 that can give us the true holiness, which we have 
 by virtue of our new birth." 33 It is in vain, there- 
 fore, for Mr. Goode to quote a few words from 
 Hooker, which imply, as he supposes, that in his 
 earlier years that great man had received the Cal- 
 vinistic doctrine of Perseverance. If this were as 
 certain as it is dubious, it would furnish no kind of 
 answer to Dr. Ward's assertion : " Mr. Hooker 
 saith as we say, touching the efficacy of Baptism in 
 infants, and yet holdeth the doctrine de perseveran- 
 tiafidelium as well as we do. 553 
 
 Nor is it Hooker only, but every one of those 
 great lights of the Elizabethan age, to whom Mr. 
 
 32 Eccles. Pol. v. 64. 33 TJsher's Life, p. 439. 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 277 
 
 Goode has referred, by whom in this capital parti- 
 cular he is deserted. So that we have a decisive 
 proof that the theory of Ward and Davenant gave 
 expression only to those truths, which had been 
 affirmed by the acts of their predecessors. Mr. 
 Goode could not, therefore, even if he w T ould, cut 
 these men off from the chain of his authorities, to 
 which they are linked by unity of principle as well 
 as by the opinion of their age. Davenant, Mr. 
 Goode admits, " no one will deny to be a Calvin- 
 ist;" and Prynne, with w T hom in his arguments he 
 precisely harmonizes, appeals to Ward as one of 
 the " three famous Divines of our Church," w T hom 
 he cites as witnesses against Arminianism. W T ho, 
 indeed, w r ere the reputed heads of the Calvinistic 
 party, if not the delegates at Dort ? So that Mr. 
 Goode is utterly put out of court by his ow r n wit- 
 nesses. His whole theory turns upon the assertion, 
 that " no man, holding the system of doctrines 
 called Calvinistic, can consistently hold that the 
 universal effect of Baptism in infants is to produce 
 spiritual regeneration." But here we have leaders 
 of the Calvinistic party, w r ho not only affirmed this 
 last truth, but wrote letters, and published disputa- 
 tions to prove their consistency. How could 
 things, w r hich w r ere incompatible in theory, be har- 
 monized in fact ? And these men are linked to the 
 generations which preceded them, not only by uni- 
 formity in their theoretical professions, but by the 
 more weighty argument of accordance in their acts. 
 
 Here, then, I terminate this historical survey of 
 the sentiments of our older writers. It has been 
 seen, that our Formularies were not compiled by 
 24 
 
278 the: English divines 
 
 Calvinists; and that if some of the distinguished 
 men who have adorned our Church accepted the 
 Calvinistic theory of Absolute Decrees, yet that it 
 does not follow that they must have rejected the 
 doctrine of Sacramental grace. It was open to 
 any of them to adopt that course, which some of 
 them have been shown to have adopted. Suppose, 
 however, the matter were otherwise. Suppose, for 
 argument's sake, that Mr. Goode's theory could be 
 substantiated ; and that those who compiled our 
 Liturgical Offices could be shown to have been 
 such rigid Calvinists, that they could not believe in 
 the universality of those gifts of grace which they 
 proffered to others. Yet how after all would this 
 profit him — what excuse would the example of 
 their forefathers afford to the clergy of the present 
 day, if they say one thing and believe another? 
 Would not the people of England rise up as one 
 man against our established system, if they were 
 satisfied that it was only to be supported by sup- 
 positions which were based upon artifice and 
 fraud ? 
 
 That very many, of the laity especially, have 
 been induced to question or disbelieve baptismal 
 grace, is too true ; but most of them are rather in- 
 fluenced by its lack of effect (a thing which must 
 be traced to those various causes by which Our 
 Lord accounts for the unfruitfulness of the Divine 
 seed,) than by any affection for the rigors of Cal- 
 vinism. Indeed, I feel persuaded that Mr. Goode 
 did not take the best means of rendering his prin- 
 ciples acceptable to the English mind when he 
 based them on this system. For besides the harsh- 
 ness, which has been commonly objected to it — its 
 
ALWAYS MAINTAINED BAPTISMAL GRACE. 279 
 
 combination with our established Formularies offends 
 against that love of truth, which is the characteris- 
 tic virtue of our nation. For what is Mr. Goode's 
 hypothesis? Grace, he says, is offered generally 
 and unconditionally in the ordinances of the Church, 
 but this general olfer was meant to be qualified by 
 the fact, that for a certain portion only of mankind 
 is this blessing of salvation designed, while the rest 
 must fall by inevitable sentence into endless misery. 
 This secret decree and sentence of God is that 
 which puts a limit upon the apparently expansive 
 language of our service. Now I wave all men- 
 tion of the harshness of this system — of its tendency 
 to encourage some in carelessness, and to plunge 
 others into despair. At present I speak of it only 
 as offending against that fairness and love of truth, 
 which is at the basis of all morality. For suppose 
 these events to have happened in the case of 
 some earthly sovereign, w T ho offered terms of par- 
 don and grace to his rebellious subjects. Suppose 
 that through his appointed ministers he made 
 known those general offers, from which there 
 seemed to be no exceptions. Let them include, 
 not only the adult offenders, but likewise the infant 
 heirs of those whose parents had forfeited their 
 rights. Suppose, then, that after these terms had 
 been publicly promulgated, it was found that they 
 were limited by some private list of exceptions pre- 
 pared by the Prince. Let this list not extend 
 merely to the grown offenders, who might be sup- 
 posed to provoke censure by their suspected dis- 
 loyalty, but let it compromise also the infant claim- 
 ants of the promised grace. Now, would it be 
 any excuse to the ministers by whom such pro- 
 
280 THE ENGLISH DIVINES, ETC. 
 
 mises were made public, that they had themselves 
 entertained a private conviction that they were not 
 unqualified ? Would their conviction of the ex- 
 istence of a secret decree, by which alone men 
 were capacitated to share in the public offer, ex- 
 onerate them for making public what they knew to 
 be deceptive ? What would be said of such 
 ministers ? We may add, what would be said of 
 such a Prince ? And shall that which would dis- 
 credit a human Potentate, be attributed to the 
 God of truth ? " Shall not the judge of all the 
 earth do right ?" Let not men question, then the 
 certainty of the Divine Promises, even if they are 
 unable to reconcile them with those mysteries of 
 the Divine Decrees, which lie too deep for their 
 sight. Let not man " make his retreat to the 
 mysteries of God's unfathomable counsels, as the 
 reason of that (which is its contradictory,) his at- 
 tempting to fathom and define them." God's pro- 
 mises are to be " taken as they be generally set 
 forth in Holy Scripture." For His promises are as 
 certain as His existence, and His truth as unfailing 
 as His power. 
 
281 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The considerations adduced in the previous 
 Chapters, have been designed to lead to a more 
 full comprehension of the exact points, respecting 
 which those who differ on the question of Holy 
 Baptism are at issue ; and thus to enable the rea- 
 der to discern whether the Church of England 
 has really pronounced any opinion between the 
 conflicting parties. I shall now briefly recapitu- 
 late what has been stated, in order that the dif- 
 ferent systems which claim assent maybe brought 
 more pointedly into contrast, and that it may be 
 distinctly understood what are the alternatives 
 which lie before us. 
 
 It has been stated, then, in the preceding pages, 
 that Regeneration is the re-creation of man's na- 
 ture in Christ {Chap, i.) That great event, which 
 so long lay hid in the womb of time, was not fully 
 made known till in the Advent of the Son of Man 
 it was accomplished. Yet its Decree in the secret 
 counsels of the All-merciful was the redeeming 
 principle of man's race ever since the Fall ; and 
 its Promulgation through tradition, type, or pro- 
 phecy, gave their significance to the various rites 
 either of Jewish or Patriarchal worship. But with 
 these we have no present concern ; we need not 
 ask how far they rested on supernatural gifts, and 
 how far on natural devotion ; seeing that the 
 present inquiry refers to the religion of grace, not 
 24* 
 
282 CONCLUSION. 
 
 that of nature ; nor yet that its object is Judaism, 
 but Christianity. By the Christian religion is 
 meant the scheme of Christ's Mediation — that new 
 law, whereby it pleased God that in the Humanity 
 of the One Atoning Mediator there should be em- 
 bodied those Divine gifts, by which the degeneracy 
 of man's nature might be remedied. Now the 
 apppointed means, whereby each individual enters 
 into the line of this regenerate race, is Holy Bap- 
 tism. This has been shown to be the revealed 
 statement of Holy Scripture [Chap, ii.,) and to be 
 taught by the Church of England in her public 
 Offices {Chap, iii.) And it has been shown fur- 
 ther, that belief in this doctrine of Baptismal Re- 
 generation is of radical importance ; not merely 
 on account of the practical consequences which 
 it directly involves (by suggesting grounds for 
 watchfulness and gratitude,) but still more as fur- 
 nishing a criterion of men's general belief in the 
 sacramental efficacy of Our Lord's Mediation 
 [Chap, iv.) 
 
 These positive statements received fuller eluci- 
 dation in the course of those negative ones, by 
 which they were followed. For it was essential 
 to show in vindication of the views just recited, 
 that the Primitive doctrine of Divine Decrees in 
 no way interfered with those scriptural promises, 
 which are founded upon the Mediator's Sacra- 
 mental agency [Chop, v.) And when we pass 
 from the Primitive doctrine of Decrees to that of 
 Calvinism, we found that the efficacy of Sacra- 
 mental grace was fully avowed by some of very 
 chief adherents of the latter system (Chap, vii.) 
 Yet this circumstance is more valuable, as prov- 
 
CONCLUSION. 283 
 
 ing the fairness of those who thus expressed 
 themselves, than as indicating the judgment of 
 the English Church. For not only are its For- 
 mularies too explicit to be explained away, but 
 it has been shown that those who compiled them 
 did not themselves accord with the sentiments 
 of Calvin [Chap, vi.) 
 
 The Church's estimate, then, of Holy Baptism, 
 may be expressed in the two following proposi- 
 tions — first, Baptism is the appointed means 
 whereby the Divine Giver is pleased to bestow 
 His grace for the regeneration of men. Secondly, 
 This gift is bestowed upon all infants, to whom 
 Holy Baptism is duly administered. And these 
 assertions bring the Church's doctrine into direct 
 contrast with the two counter-systems, by which 
 it is opposed. For they will be found to turn 
 upon the denial of these two assertions — the first 
 maintaining that Grace is not bestowed by the 
 Giver through Baptism ; the second, that if be- 
 stowed at times, it is not bestowed upon all in- 
 fants, to whom Holy Baptism is duly administered. 
 I shall briefly recall to the reader's attention the 
 grounds upon which these two counter-systems 
 are founded, and the considerations by which the 
 Church's doctrine has been maintained against 
 them. 
 
 Those w T ho deny that God bestows grace 
 through Baptism, found their objections on two 
 circumstances ; first, the incongruity between an 
 outward rite and an inw r ard blessing; and next, 
 the want of result by which it is actually attended. 
 It has been shown, in reply to the last objection, 
 that no argument, based on the inefficiency of 
 
% 2S4 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Baptism, can be admitted, while the Church- 
 Discipline and Church-Education remain in their 
 present unsatisfactory state (p. 43.) The other 
 objection was shown to be directed against the 
 system of Mediation at large; and to be founded 
 upon a forgetfulness that the law of grace has 
 superseded the law of nature (p. 46.) For if it be 
 allowed that all spiritual blessings are communi- 
 cated to mankind through the Humanity of the 
 Second Adam, it is no objection against the re- 
 vealed media of Christian communion, that they 
 are not founded on that natural relation of mind 
 to mind, whereby the spirits of men were origi- 
 nally fitted to hold intercourse with their Spiritual 
 Maker. So that the efficacy of Baptism is an out- 
 post which the Church has to maintain in that 
 protracted but ineffectual warfare, which the pride 
 of human reason continues to wao-e against the 
 Faith of the Cross. 
 
 The objection just mentioned, which is founded, 
 in truth, upon the system of Rationalism, is of 
 course applicable to Baptism at large ; but the 
 Baptism of infants is the point against which its 
 assaults are peculiarly directed. This may be 
 owing in part to the circumstance that infant 
 Baptism is the rule, and adult Baptism the excep- 
 tion. For though Baptism began with adults, yet 
 so soon as the Church had entered upon her 
 course, she gathered to herself infants, as the na- 
 tural recipients of her earliest blessing. So that 
 their case has suggested her common usages, and 
 the language of her offices. A further reason is, 
 that infant Baptism supplies so effectual a criterion 
 for discriminating the agency of the Divine Giver 
 
CONCLUSION. 285 
 
 of grace from its human receivers (p. 128.) So 
 that if the efficacy of infant Baptism be admitted, 
 it follows at once that the Humanity of the Second 
 Adam is a channel through which God bestows 
 heavenly blessings. And this is the very point in 
 contest between the Church and the Rationalism 
 of the age. Men admit readily that God bestows 
 spiritual gifts, provided He is supposed to bestow 
 them through those secret influences, by which He 
 sways the hearts of His creatures. For this is but 
 to admit that law of creation, which supposes the 
 mind to retain a natural relation to its Parent 
 Spirit ; it is no interruption therefore of the course 
 of nature, and does not supersede the usual pro- 
 cess of thought (p. 136.) That which men are 
 reluctant to admit is the Mediation of the God- 
 man — that " God" is " in Christ, reconciling to 
 Himself the world." For this brings in the whole 
 system of the Church — its services, its servants, 
 its Sacramental ordinances, as being that peculiar 
 agency, whereby the line of the New Adam super- 
 sedes the line of the old one. 
 
 Now this leads to the second of those two sys- 
 tems, which is opposed to that of the Church ; a 
 system which has its origin in different motives 
 from the first, and rests its objections on other 
 grounds. If its adherents deny the efficacy of the 
 Sacramental system, it is not from any professed 
 intent of maintaining the dignity of nature, but 
 from fear lest religion herself should be prejudiced 
 by dependence on external forms. This is no 
 doubt a groundless apprehension ; for there is no 
 reason why a high estimate of the importance and 
 efficacy of God's grace should interfere with any 
 

 286 CONCLUSION. 
 
 man's conscientiousness. Yet this fear leads many 
 persons, who allow that God bestows grace at 
 times in Baptism, to deny that grace is bestowed 
 upon all infants w T ho are duly baptized. 
 
 The reason w r hy infant Baptism is the peculiar 
 point in which these parties come into collision with 
 the Church's declarations, is only because it affords 
 the readiest criterion for determining whether the 
 blessing is supposed to depend on God's act in the 
 ordinance itself, or on the value of those disposi- 
 tions which men bring to its reception. Mr. Goode 
 states that his anxiety is, lest the dignity of the 
 ministerial office should be overrated, and too much 
 importance be attached to the persons by whom 
 Baptism is administered. He forgets, apparently, 
 that where this Sacrament is most highly thought 
 of, as for example in the Church of Rome, its 
 validity is not supposed to rest upon the character 
 of the administrator ; and that in our own Church 
 it was the Puritan party who w T ere anxious to con- 
 fine its ministration to the clergy, and its celebra- 
 tion to the occasions of public worship. So that 
 the case does not turn upon the person of the ad- 
 ministrator, but on the question whether words and 
 elements have been really invested with any super- 
 natural efficacy, by being appointed to be the means 
 of admission into the mystical Body of Christ. 
 
 However distinct therefore, this system may be 
 from that of Rationalism, it touches upon it in some 
 important particulars. Those who maintain it are 
 not conscious, undoubtedly, of the least intention 
 of derogating from the reality of Our Lord's Media- 
 tion. Yet they are sometimes found to borrow 
 arguments, and derive co-operation from quarters 
 
CONCLUSION. 287 
 
 with which they ought to have no sympathy. And 
 since they deny that grace is always bestowed by 
 God in Holy Baptism, there is danger lest His 
 casual and uncertain action should be confounded 
 with that general agency of the Creative Power, the 
 times and laws whereof it is impossible to restrict. 
 For those who deny Divine help to mean any thing 
 more than that activity of the created mind, which 
 may ultimately be referred to the workmanship of 
 its Creator (thus overthrowing the whole scheme 
 of Mediation,) yet allow that this activity may dis- 
 play itself simultaneously with the exhibition of 
 sacraments, as well as at any other period (p. 136.) 
 The only security against such misunderstanding, is 
 the full admission of the Church's doctrine ; the 
 avowal, namely, that a spiritual gift is bestowed 
 upon all infants through that act, whereby they are 
 taken out of the line of Adam and grafted into the 
 line of Christ. So that the opposition which is 
 founded upon the first or Rationalistic principle — 
 upon the alleged inefficacy, that is, of Baptism, or 
 upon the unreasonableness of expecting material 
 means to involve a spiritual effect — is not unfre- 
 quently countenanced by those, whose objections 
 are founded on a professedly religious basis (p. 134.) 
 For while these last go beyond the Rationalistic 
 system in allowing that some infants receive grace 
 in Baptism, they agree with it in falling short of the 
 Church's doctrine, that grace is bestowed upon all. 
 The alleged ground upon which this second 
 counter-system is rested, is that certain conditions 
 are requisite, where infant Baptism is to have its 
 due effect. These conditions are stated by Mr. 
 Goode to be either a sentence of election on the 
 

 2S J CONCLUSION. 
 
 part of God, or the prevision of faith and repent- 
 ance in the child, or, finally, the character of its 
 parents. It is not possible to adduce any express 
 words, either of Holy Scripture or of the Church, 
 in which it is stated that such qualifications are 
 required by infants. But the analogy of adult 
 Baptism suggests the consideration, 1 that since 
 this rite implies both a giver and a receiver, its 
 efficacy may possibly be invalidated by question- 
 ing the intention of the one, or the fitness of the 
 other. And, further, since the present condition 
 of the infant receiver affords no ground on which 
 exceptions can be built, those who desire to dis- 
 criminate the qualifications of one infant from 
 those of another, are led to push their inquiries 
 forward into its future life, or back into the cir- 
 cumstances of its parentage. Such is the history 
 of those qualifications for infant Baptism, the in- 
 troduction of which Mr. Goode states to be the 
 fundamental principle of his work. The reader 
 shall be reminded what qualification for infant 
 Baptism is allowed by the Church — and on what 
 grounds the others have been asserted to be in- 
 admissible. 
 
 The intention of the Giver of grace is held by 
 the Church to be sufficiently expounded by His 
 actions. To suppose that God sanctions the min- 
 istration of Baptism to infants as a means of join- 
 ing them to the Body of Christ, while by a secret 
 
 1 So Mr Gorham says, " the unconditional efficacy of Baptism, 
 when rightly administered, was the point enforced by the Bish- 
 op ;" " the conditional efficacy of that Sacrament as dependent 
 on due reception, was the doctrine defended by myself. ' — (In- 
 troduction,]), xxiv.) 
 
CONCLUSION. 289 
 
 Decree He incapacitates those on whom the bless- 
 ing is bestowed from profiting by his bounty, is 
 incompatible not only with His mercy but with 
 His truth. Such a supposition was rejected, as 
 we have seen, even by Divines who had been 
 delegates at Dort, as rendering the tenet of Repro- 
 bation too revolting, and outdoing the rigors of 
 Fatalism itself {p. 261.) And the Church pro- 
 nounces against it, by declaring to the friends of 
 every child ; " Doubt ye not therefore, but earnestly 
 believe, that He will likewise favourably receive 
 this present infant" (p. 83.) 
 
 From this condition of " a previous sentence 
 of election," which Mr. Goode himself virtually 
 abandons (p. 268,) we turn to the other party in 
 Baptism — namely, the receiver of grace. What 
 qualifications can the child possess, as fitting it to 
 be the receiver of Baptism ? 
 
 Now the main difference between the Church's 
 system, and that which Mr. Goode opposes to it, 
 is that according to the first the child's qualifica- 
 tion is its present state ; according to the second, 
 either its future condition or the character of its 
 parents. The child's present condition is simply 
 its possession of that corrupt nature, which it in- 
 herits from our common parent. And this is all 
 which the Church requires as its qualification for 
 Baptism (p. 66.) So soon as the individual re- 
 sponsibility is able either to oppose God's grace 
 or to accept it, she adds such conditions as grow 
 out of this power. In respect to infants she adds 
 none. And the fact that she expresses such con- 
 ditions in the case of adults, instead of showing, as 
 Mr. Goode supposes, that she designed them to be 
 25 
 
290 CONCLUSION. 
 
 implied in the case of infants, is a clear proof that 
 in the latter case she employs none, because she 
 designs that none should be employed (p. 74, 
 212.) She does not bestow Baptism, indeed, 
 where there is no hope of a Christian education ; 
 not however because such children are incapable 
 of receiving the gift, but because they must be ex- 
 pected to profane it. All this is evident, not only 
 by reference to her more extended services, but 
 especially from that office which is provided for 
 cases of emergency, in which, therefore none but 
 essential particulars are included (p. 113.) 
 
 Such is the Church's system ; a system which 
 considers all infants who inherit the nature of the 
 old Adam, to be fit candidates for the blessings 
 of the new. Now for this qualification Mr. Goode 
 has substituted two others — one drawn from a 
 prevision of the child's future conduct, the other 
 from the character of its parents. It has been 
 shown, however, that the words of our Catechism 
 were not designed, as Mr. Goode imagines, to af- 
 ford any countenance to the first of these condi- 
 tions ; neither is it possible that they should 
 countenance it. For this condition has been 
 proved to be distinctly Pelagian in its tendency ; 
 and therefore to be opposed to the whole system 
 of the Church (p. 105.) There remains the other 
 condition, derived from the character of the pa- 
 rents. And this likewise has been shown to be 
 incompatible with the system of Christianity, and 
 to militate against its cardinal principle, the Me- 
 diation of Christ (p. 272.) So that both these 
 conditions are as inconsistent with the principles 
 of revealed, as that which is adduced from God's 
 
CONCLUSION. 291 
 
 absolute decrees, with those of natural religion. 
 And the qualification which is rested on the faith 
 of the parents is no less contrary to the laws of 
 the Church than to its doctrines. For to act upon 
 it would be a direct infraction of Canons, which 
 the Church's Courts neither would nor could al- 
 low (p. 98, 276.) 
 
 There remains no alternative, then, but the ac- 
 ceptance of that more tolerant course, w T hich the 
 Church Catholic has ever pursued. And this is 
 not less accordant with the best feelings of men, 
 than with the revelation of God. For what so 
 much commends infancy even to human aid as its 
 helplessness ? And what, therefore, can more 
 fitly commend it to His pity, whose mercy is over 
 all His works?" Why, then, should we doubt that 
 their necessities are our best plea in bringing our 
 infants to the Good Shepherd? 
 

EXTRACTS, 
 
 Translated frox Dn. Samuel Ward's "Determina- 
 
 TIONES TlIEOLOGICTE," PUBLISHED BT SeTH WaRD, U. D., 
 
 LoxdOxV, 1658, p. 44-47. 
 
 Sacraments confer grace on those who place no bar. 
 
 * * # # * 
 
 We say that Sacraments confer grace in the above mentioned 
 manner on those who place no bar, whereby we mean on all 
 who place no bar against them. That this may be understood, 
 wo must say what would be a bar. This term the Schoolmen 
 took from St. Augustin, who says, in his 23d Epistle, that an 
 infant receives the Sacrament of faith to his salvation, if he 
 does not oppose to faith the bar of any contradictory thought : 
 as for instance an act of unbelief, or of contempt, or of indiffer- 
 ence. The Schoolmen, following St. Augustin, understand by 
 a bar any mortal sin, which opposes saving grace ; whether it 
 be the refusal of consent, or dissent ; whether it be the not 
 opening the heart when grace is given, or the shutting it — as 
 Bradwardin explains the matter. — (J)c Causa Dei. ii. 32.) 
 
 When we say, then, that Sacraments confer grace on those who 
 do not place a bar, we do not say that Sacraments confer grace 
 absolutely on every receiver, inasmuch as men who are indis- 
 posed and unworthy are not meet subjects, and therefore, by 
 reason of their state, not capable of Divine grace. The confer- 
 ring, therefore, of grace by Sacraments must be conditional, and 
 depend upon a certain law; neither can there be a more suit- 
 able condition laid down, than that no bar should be found in 
 the recipient — nothing, that is, which withstands God's grace. 
 There are two ways in which sin puts a bar; either by the 
 commission of an offence, or by the omission of a bounden ami 
 possible duty. From which it may be understood what it is 
 not to place a bar to the Sacraments. A man is said not la 
 place a bar, either — first, By not opposing a fresh sin, when he 
 might oppose it; secondly, By preparing himself properly for the 
 reception of the Sacrament, and removing hindrances; thirdly, 
 By being simply negative so far as concerns any previous dis- 
 
 25* (293) 
 
294 p;xtracts. 
 
 positions, in case it is neither in his power to commit any new 
 sin, nor to prepare himself to be a fit and worthy receiver. 
 
 In the third of these ways infants place no bar; as well as 
 all those, who are capahle of grace, and yet cannot act as moral 
 agents, from the deficiency of their understanding, and from not 
 possessing the power of will. Their condition makes it impos- 
 sible that they should oppose a bar ; and therefore we say, that 
 on them Sacraments infallibly confer grace. 
 
 Every one who comes to the Sacrament fitly and rightly pre- 
 pared, may be said in (he second way to place no bar. 
 
 The first mode — that is, the not opposing a new sin, when 
 one might oppose it — is not sufficient to obtain the eflect of a 
 Sacrament for its adult receivers For not to opppose a bar by 
 abstaining from fresh sin is not sufficient; but a right disposi- 
 tion, and positive preparation is required to render an adult a 
 lit receiver. It is most material to observe, that though the 
 death of Christ is the most powerful and efficacious remedy 
 against every kind of sin; yet, that unless taken and applied, it 
 is profitless. And this application is not made by an adult 
 receiver of the Sacrament, unless he comes fitly prepared to 
 these Holy Mysteries. And that any one may be prepared, 
 there need various dispositions — a belief in the Catholic Faith, 
 the hope of pardon, fear of punishment, sorrow for sin, purpose 
 of amendment, intent to lead ft new life — all which are things 
 which prepare the receiver. There must also be a true and 
 living faith in Christ the Mediator for the remission of sins, 
 seeing that He is the only medium whereby the redemption of 
 Christ is applied instrumentally for the remission of sins. On 
 a man who is thus prepared, by virtue of the Divine promise 
 there is infallibly conferred grace ; as well to secure to him 
 the righteousness of faith, as to increase and seal inherent 
 righteousness. 
 
 After these previous explanations, our Thesis may be con- 
 veniently proved by some conclusions, both in the Sacrament of 
 Baptism, and in that of the Eucharist. 
 
 Our first conclusion is this; as infants place no bar. Baptism 
 always confers upon them the first measure of grace, namely, 
 the forgiveness of Original Sin. The proofs are : — 
 
 First — Every infant is conceived and born in sin, as David 
 confesses about himself, Ps. li. 7; Job xiv. 4 ; Eph. ii. 3 ; tli.tt 
 is, he is subject to Original Sin. But when a child of this sort 
 has been received by Baptism, a promise of remission of sins is 
 
EXTRACTS. 295 
 
 made to him ; Acts ii. 38, 39. Here a promise of forgiveness of 
 sins is made to the baptized seed of the Israelites ; as to the cir- 
 cumcised seed of pious men was given a promise of peculiar 
 protection, in which was involved the promise of forgiveness. 
 You therefore visibly perform the Sacrament of initiation ; it 
 applies and confers, on the part of God, the real thing, which is 
 promised — namely, grace for the remission of Original Sin. The 
 infant receiver, on his part, makes no opposition, nor can make 
 any ; so as to prevent him from being a capable suscipicnt of 
 the remission which is exhibited and conferred. Therefore on 
 infants as putting no bar, the Sacrament of Baptism infallibly 
 confers grace for the remission of Original Sin. 
 
 Secondly — If Baptism is only a sign of grace, and does not 
 confer it, nothing is given to those who die in infancy, nor on 
 non-elect infants who survive is any thing ever conferred by vir- 
 tue of the Sacrament. To them, therefore, it would be nothing 
 but a naked and inefficacious sign, which ought not to be assert- 
 ed. For either Baptism confers grace for the remission of 
 Original Guilt, so far as no impediment is opposed on the part 
 of the receiver, or it is possible to assign some more fitting con- 
 dition, by his legitimate compliance with which it would be cifi- 
 cacious to him. But it is impossible to assign any more fitting 
 condition, which can be complied with by those parties, who, from 
 want of reason and will (of which this age is incapable,) are un- 
 able to do any thing as moral agents. Hence Augustin most truly 
 says (Ep. xxiii.,) that infants receive the Sacrament of faith, 
 i. e. Baptism, to their salvation, if they do not oppose against 
 faith the bar of hostile thought, or of any evil action. But an 
 infant cannot oppose the bar of evil thought, or an evil action, 
 since it can neither think nor act with any freedom. In its 
 case, therefore, because it places no bar, Baptism is sure of hav- 
 ing its proper efficacy, so far as concerns the conferring grace 
 for the remission of Original Guilt. 
 
 Thirdly — God has ordered the infants of the faithful to be bap- 
 tized under the new Covenant, as under the old he ordered them 
 to be circumcised ; and to this command he has annexed the 
 promise of remitting their original guilt, which is the first and 
 main benefit, whereof an infant is capable ; and so much the 
 very symbol of ablution expresses. But God does not order 
 any to be baptized, except those who arc capable of the benefits 
 bi" Baptism, and who need them: and seeing that infants are 
 incapable of opposing any bar, and need no predisposition, they 
 
296 EXTRACTS. 
 
 are fit to receive the thing, which baptismal ablution expresses. 
 What is to hinder this Sacrament therefore from being a true 
 sign of the grace which it expresses; why should it not be a 
 real exhibition of the purpose, which is intended on the part of 
 God, and proceed without fail to the completion of its purpose ? 
 Therefore, when an infant is baptized according to the Divine 
 appointment, the thing which is expressed by the Sacrament is 
 regularly conferred upon it ; and this thing is not merely the 
 giving a pledge of the forgiveness of original guilt, when it shall 
 have grown up, and become capable of faith and penitence ; but 
 it is the actual application of the first remission of original guilt 
 (before unforgiven,) which is bestowed in the Sacramental ablu- 
 tion itself. 
 
 Fourthly — The ordinary media of applying the merits of Christ 
 are no other than the Word and the Sacraments. But the 
 Word does not apply the merits of Christ to an infant, who is 
 brought to be baptized, because the Word cannot have its effect 
 till it is understood ; neither is there any Sacrament, except 
 Baptism, which is applicable to infants. Either, therefore, no 
 ordinary medium is provided on the part of God, for the applica- 
 tion of Christ's merits to unresisting infants, or the Sacrament 
 of Baptism is such a medium; seeing that no other ordinary 
 medium on the part of God is revealed in Scripture. On infants, 
 therefore, since they place no bar against it, the Sacrament of 
 Baptism infallibly confers grace for the remission of original 
 sin. 
 
 Fifthly — Supposing that infants, not placing a bar, do not 
 receive grace for the remission of original sin from Baptism, it 
 might seem that God does not act seriously and truly with the 
 recipient, whom He wills and orders to be baptized. Whereas 
 a new covenant was made with the whole human race, God 
 i would seem to be wanting to its signs and Sacraments, though 
 the same were ordered and were rightly administered ; and 
 (which it were an impiety to suppose) not to stand to His pro- 
 mises. Wherefore it must be said, that God, whom no impedi- 
 ment withstands on the part of the receiver (no resistance, that 
 is, from his free-agency,) is not wanting to His own appoint- 
 ment, but confers the remission of original guilt on the baptized 
 infant Hence Augustin says, Ep. clvii., "The remission of 
 sins, even in the Baptism of infants, is no unreal process, no 
 matter of words, but an actual fact." I say nothing about the 
 consent of Antiquity in this matter, about which it were crimi- 
 
EXTRACTS. 297 
 
 nal to doubt. I will only adduce Prosper's statement : " if any 
 one says that the grace conferred in Baptism does not take away 
 original sin in those who are not predestinated, he is no 
 Catholic." 
 
 All baptized infants are undoubtedly justified. 1 p. 50-53. 
 * # # * - • * * 
 
 . . . . It is further inquired, whether all infants rightly 
 baptized are undoubtedly justified. Here some very learned 
 theologians hesitate ; inasmuch as they restrict this effect of jus- 
 tification from original sin to elect infants. We make two as- 
 sertions — first, that all infants, rightly baptized, who die in their 
 infancy, are unquestionably justified. 
 
 This is laid down by the Church of England in her Ritual ; 
 in the Rubric, which speaks of the delay of Confirmation. Lest 
 any << man shall think that any detriment shall come to chil- 
 dren by deferring of their Confirmation, he shall know for truth, 
 that it is certain, by God's word, that children being baptized, 
 have all things necessary for their salvation, and be undoubtedly 
 saved." Now, here it is said that infants who are baptized have 
 all things necessary for their salvation (necessary, that is, in 
 the infant state ;) and are undoubtedly saved. This must mean 
 
 1 This proposition does not affirm more than the Homily of 
 Salvation, to which we are referred by the Xlth Art., as explaining, 
 the nature of Justification. " Our office is not to pass the time 
 of this present life unfruitfully and idly, after that we are bap- 
 tized or justified.'''' Mr. Goode would escape from the force of 
 this passage on the ground that it is possible to assign " another 
 sense" "for the word 'or'" But though the word 'or' 
 is used to indicate both identity and contrast, yet the context al- 
 ways indicates which it means. Again, if it does not mean the 
 first, it must mean the second. So that if Cranmer did not 
 mean to affirm that which his words naturally imply, he must 
 have designed to say that there were two ways of entering into 
 a state of grace, one being Holy Baptism, the other that which 
 was to be employed in the caso of those who were not baptized, 
 namely, Justification. 
 
EXTRACTS. 
 
 of course, if they die as children, for it is certain that many who 
 have been baptized and grow up are not saved. These expres- 
 sions, as they occur in our present Ritual, are taken, word for 
 word, from the Ritual which was published a. d. 1552, in the 
 fifth year of Edward VT. ; but they are still more plainly put in 
 the first revision, in the second year of Edward, a. m 1549, 
 which may be found in Bucer's Scripta Anglicana. " And that 
 no man shall think that any detriment shall come to children by 
 deferring of their confirmation : he shall know for truth, ' that it 
 is certain by God's word, that children being baptized (if they 
 depart out of this life in their infancy,) are undoubtedly saved." 
 Now this is nearly the same statement which was made in the 
 synodal book, issued by the authority of the whole English 
 clergy, a. d. 1537, called the " Institution of a Christian Man," 
 in the Chapter on the Sacrament of Confirmation. « It is not 
 to be thought that there is any such necessity of Confirmation of 
 infants, but that they being baptized, and dying innocent before 
 they be confirmed, shall be assured to attain everlasting life, 
 and salvation by the effect of the Sacrament of Baptism before 
 received." Nearly the same thing is to be found in another 
 book, called the "Institution of a Christian Man," which was 
 published six years afterwards, by the authority of Henry VIII., 
 [i. e, the necessary Doctrine and Erudition, &c] In the 
 "Homily of Salvation," published 1547, in the first year of Ed- 
 ward VI., occurs the statement, '< that infants, being baptized, 
 and dying in their infancy, are by this sacrifice washed from 
 their sins, brought to God's favour, and made His children, and 
 inheritors of His kingdom of heaven." 
 
 From the passages which have been quoted we see, that, 
 according to the received doctrine of the Church of England, it 
 is clear by God's Word, that infants who are rightly baptized 
 have all things necessary for their salvation, i. e., in the state of 
 infancy ; and if they die in that state, must undoubtedly be 
 saved. Now, when our Churcn says that the salvation of such 
 infants is certain by God's Word, much more must she intend 
 to affirm the same thing respecting their justification, by the 
 removal of the guilt of original sin, since there can be no salva- 
 tion, unless original guilt has first been done away. 
 
 This justification of baptized infants, dying in that tender age, 
 stands on these firm principles. First — It rests on the nature. 
 of this Sacrament, which is the only mean, remedy, or Sacra- 
 ment appointed by God to apply Christ's merits to such infants, 
 
EXTRACTS. 299 
 
 for the washing away of original sin. Either, therefore, it must 
 be held that Baptism is not by God's appointment a sufficient 
 remedy to those whose only remedy it is, which is an intolerable 
 supposition ; or else that it is an efficacious Sacrament, where- 
 by in such infants original sin is done away. 
 
 . . . Thirdly — God always works efficaciously in His Sacra- 
 ments in these cases, in which the receiver, being unable to 
 give any positive assent, opposes no obstacle. Hence Augustin 
 says that an infant receives the Sacrament of Faith, i. e. Bap- 
 tism, to his salvation, if he does not oppose to faith the obstacle 
 of opposing thought (Ep. 23.) But infants cannot oppose such 
 a bar : in them therefore Baptism is sure to be efficacious for 
 the removal of original sin. Let us see what was the sense of 
 Antiquity in this matter 
 
 This was our first assertion : our second is, that all infants, 
 even those who are non-elect, and who will ultimately perish, 
 if duly baptized in their infancy, are freed in Baptism from the 
 guilt of original sin. 
 
 The grounds of this assertion are — first, the nature of Sacra- 
 ments ; which by Divine appointment are efficacious signs, and 
 so efficacious, that where no impediment is opposed by the re- 
 ceiver, they have their effect, according to the receiver's capa- 
 city 
 
 Secondly — The same thing is shown by the words of admi- 
 nistration, which the Minister pronounces in the present tense, 
 while he is baptizing. He says, « I dip," or*, "I baptize thee 
 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost ;" from which it is obvious that Baptism really effects that 
 
 which the Minister pronounces Fourthly — 
 
 Sacraments are rightly called moral 2 instruments, and organs 
 which exhibit the grace which they signify. How, then, shall 
 Baptism be called an instrument of grace, when used respecting 
 infants, if when it is actually used and applied to them, and is 
 
 2 On the statement that Sacraments are moral instruments, 
 Mr. Goode, quotes a passage from Estius, which is referred 
 to also by Dr. Pusey ("Scriptural Views of Baptism," p. 127, 
 1st Ed.) Estius denies respecting Sacraments " virtutem ali- 
 quam creatam eis incesse :" he maintains that " divinia virtus 
 sacramentis ad producendum gratia? effectum certo et infallibi- 
 ter ex Christi promisione assistit." — In Lib. iv. Sentent. Dist. 
 i. n. 5. 
 
300 * EXTRACTS. 
 
 not hindered of its perfect action by any resistance derived from 
 the free-agency of the receiver, it yet fails to produce that effect 
 for which by Divine appointment it was ordained. .... 
 You will say that Sacraments produce this effect, when they 
 are rightly used. Now, whatever may be the intention of the 
 Church, it may be thought that it is not God's intention that 
 this remedy should be rightly applied to a non-elect infant. I 
 reply, that it is not true that this remedy is not rightly applied 
 to a non-elect infant. I assert that the Church rightly and 
 savingly presents as well elect as non-elect infants to Baptism ; 
 that she does right in washing both indiscriminately in the 
 laver of Baptism, and that God renders His appointment effec- 
 tual, so far as the doing away original sin, whatever previous 
 decree may have been passed, in all cases in which opposition 
 is not made by the receiver's free agency. And this I will 
 prove by the consent of Antiquity 
 
 THE END. 
 
f J