An end of doctrinal controversies which have lately troubled the churches by reconciling explication without much disputing. Written by Richard Baxter.

CHAP. XIX. Of the State of Infants as to Salvation. (Book 19)

§. 1. I Have said so much of this in two Books a∣gainst the Anabaptists, and in my Christian Directory, that I shall therefore here be brief. What measure of Glory, and holy intellectual ope∣rations Infants shall have after Death, we know not; but we have reason to judge, that they shall not be like Brutes, nor so unintelligent as in the Body, nor sleep in an unactive Potentiality; but be, intellectual Agents.

§. 2. The Conceits of a middle state of those unbaptized, as having poenam damni, and not p••∣nam sensus, we know not what to make of, unless they suppose them to be not actually, but only po∣tentially intelligent: For one that is deprived of true felicity, must by knowing it, have the sense of his Privation. Nor do we find in Scripture any Proof

of their middle State, however Reason may think it congruous.

§. 3. They that think all Infants saved, go on these different grounds: 1. Some think that they have no sin: But if Pelagians could prove that, it would be no Proof that they shall have Heaven or Happiness. 2. Others think that Christ hath pardoned them all that sin which was derived from Adam: But either they mean, that his Sacrifice and Merit immediately pardoned it; or that he hath pardoned them all by the Covenant, or Law of Grace. But, 1. Christ's Sacrifice and Merits are given to God for Man, and pardon no man immediately, but only Merit a pardoning Covenant. 2. And that Covenant doth indeed in tantum, pardon all men as far as common Mercy amounteth to (for the remitting any part of the punishment, is so far to remit the sin.) But the saving-pardon in question, it giveth to no man actually before the Condition be performed; for it is but a conditio∣nal Pardon: Therefore as no one at age, so no Infant hath any Pardon given him by that Cove∣nant, that I can find, but only conditionally.

§. 4. All grant, That the Covenant pardoneth the Adult only conditionally; and if it should par∣don all Infants absolutely, their Condition would be so much more happy than that of the Adult, as is not consistent with what Scripture, Reason, and Experience speaketh. And there is no such thing said of them in the Word of God, and there∣fore not to be believed.

§. 5. Those that think not all Infants (so dy∣ing) to be saved and glorified, are also of se∣veral minds. 1. Some think that none are glorified, as being uncapable Subjects (whom I will not be∣stow

the labour to confute, nor to open the ill Consequents of it.) 2. Some think, that some are glorified, but none are positively punished with the poena sensus. These seem to me less rational than the former: For either Infants will have actual In∣tellection, and answerable Joys and Sorrows, or not: If not, the former, who reduce them all to meer Potentiality, or the state of Brutes, are in the right (of whom some will have them to be Via∣t••res after Death in vehiculo a••reo, and some are for their Transmigration, and return to Earth.) If yea, then as one part will have rational Joys, the other must have rational Sorrows, unless some re∣turn to Earth, or some middle state, be better pro∣ved than I have yet seen.

§. 6. 3. Some think, that all that are baptized, are saved, and no other, (though the rest have no Pain.) But, 1. this is not suitable to the Nature of God, as a Spirit, and as most wise and merci∣ful; nor yet to the Tenor of his Word, to lay mens Salvation and Rejection upon a meer outward ••eremony, or Act of Baptizing. The Seed of Be∣lievers may want it in many Cases of Impedition; and the Children of Cannibals and Infidels, might by Souldiers be taken away by thousands and bap∣tized against the Parents Wills, and then turned to them again to be educated: And who can believe that barbarous Souldiers that must themselves ••e damned, can thus save thousands at 〈◊〉〈◊〉 plea∣sures? There are many Infants that have no right to Baptism; and why then should it save them▪

§. 7. 4. Some think, that all that are baptized by the Parents Con••int, are saved▪ But what if a Hea••hen, or Infidel, or Athent say, I believe not

in God or Christ my self, but for worldly Ends, I desire my Child may be baptized (whether he say, I will, or I will not educate him u••to Christianity.) There is no shew of Reason, much less of Scripture, that this should save the Chil∣dren that are no better offered to God.

§. 8. 5. Some say, That all that any Christi∣an (Sinner or Hypocrite) offereth to God, and is so baptized, shall be saved; that is, That hath Christian Godfather or Godmother. But if so, then what if Christians take Heathens Children against their Wills, and baptize them, and then turn them home again? Are they saved by the Ceremony, or by Consent to the Covenant? Not by the meer Ge∣remony, as is, and shall be shewed: Not by Con∣sent of any such Christian that hath no right to them, nor power to represent them; else all the Children on Earth should be saved: For Christians would sit at home and consent for them, and dedi∣cate them to God unseen: And sure God would not refuse to save them, because of distance, nor be∣cause unseen (for the Godfather may be blind); nor because unbaptized; when it cannot be had, and the Child hindereth it not.

§. 9. 6. Some say, That it is the Churches Faith, and dedicating them to God in Baptism that is the Condition of their Salvation: But this is not in∣telligible. If by the Church they mean all the Christian World, or all a National Church, or all a Diocesan Church, yea, or all a Parish-Church, they use not to be all Godfathers, nor to offer other folks Children to be baptized; nor did I ever know one that had so common a ••ote, or was so offered: If they mean that the Churches Faith ••er∣veth whoever be the Covenanter or Offerer, then

all the Pagan World may have their Children sa∣ved by the Churches Faith, or all that can be catcht up and baptized (and so the Ceremony doth it.) But if they mean by that Church the Bishops or Presbyters, whether it must be all the Bishops of the World, or of the Nation, or one Bishop, or the Pre∣sbyter that baptizeth, every one may speak accord∣ing to his own Invention and Fancy, but with no Proof from the Word of God or Reason (as the aforesaid Disproofs do manifest.)

§. 10. 7. Some say, That any one baptized by a Godfather's offer, who undertaketh for his Chri∣stian Education, shall be saved, and no other. But, 1. The Godfather may have no Propriety in the Child, but steal him, shall that save him? 2. The Godfather may be an Hypocrite, and mean no∣thing that he promiseth; and shall the Child be saved by his Lye that damneth the Lyer himself? 3. Why should a Promise of future Education save a Child that must die to morrow, or ere long? 4. But if it be the meer opus operatum of Baptizing that must save, that may be a Profanation when unduly applied; and the Priest's sin that damneth himself, cannot save others.

§. 11. 8. Some lay the hope upon Ancest••rs Faith, and say, That if the Great Grandfathers, or others before them were faithful, the Infants shall be saved: But then are all Men saved for Noah's Faith? Or how far must our Confidence ascend?

§. 12. 9. Most of the Anabaptists with us, hold, That there is no Promise, nor Assurance of the saving of any particular Infants in the World, either Christians or Heathens; but only that God electeth some, whom he will sanctifie and save, and

reprobateth others, whom he will damn; without any notice given to the World who they be, or how many, or how few. So that we can∣not say, that he will save Ten, or that he will damn Ten of all the World; nor have the Faithful any more promise than Heathens of the Salvation of their Infants, and so are not to baptize them.

§. 13. 10. The commonest Opinion among the English Calvinists, is, That God hath made no cer∣tain Promise of the Salvation of any particular In∣fant, but by his general Promise of mercy to the Seed of the Faithful, hath given us cause to hope that more of them than of others, shall be saved; and therefore that they are by Baptism to be entred into the visible Church, as we baptize the Adult, while we are not certain but they may be Hypo∣crites.

§. 14. But I think this would not warrant their Baptism, nor give us any certain hope of any ones Salvation. God hath but one Covenant of Grace, which giveth us Christ and Life; and God hath or∣dained no Baptism, but what is for the Remission of Sin, and making us Members of Christ, if we have the Conditions of Right to Baptism. The Adult profess Faith and Repentance; if they have them in sincerity, and consent with the Heart as well as the Tongue, they are certainly pardoned: If they are Hypocrites, and consent only with the Lips, they have notoriously the Qualification which the Church must require, and so are received to outward Communion, but not that which God re∣quireth to Remission and Salvation. But if an Infant be the Child of a true Believer, he hath all that God and the Church require: And therefore if he

be to be baptized, he is certainly put into a state of Life, because no Condition is wanting on his part.

§. 15. 11. Others say, That the Children of all Christians (Sinners, or Hypocri••es) if baptized, are in a state of Pardon and Salvation; and that God will not punish the Child for the Hypocrite or prophane Parents Sin. But by that rule Heathens Children should be in as safe a case, because God will not punish them for their Parents sin. Either something on the Parents part is a Condition of the Child's Right, or nothing. If nothing, Heathens and Christians Children are equal: If something, it must be true Faith (as to God's acceptance): For whatever the Church must do, (that knoweth not the Heart) it is incredible that God should have such a Covenant [Thy Child shall be saved if thou wilt, (though lyingly) offer him to me, tho▪ thou shalt be damned for that Lye.]

§. 16. 12. That which I acquiesce in is this: That God who visited Adam's Sin on all his Poste∣rity, hath in the Covenant of Grace also so joined Infants to the Parents,* 1.1 that till they have a Will to chuse for themselves, their Parents may chuse for them, and dispose of them for their good, and God taketh them as Members of the Parents so far: And so he hath made many express Promises of mercy to the Faith∣ful and their Seed, (and Threatnings to the Wic∣ked and their Seed): And that this Mercy can∣not be consistent with their Damnation; for it is to be their God, and to love and bless them, which cannot stand with damning them. And God ha∣ving but one Covenant, seeing they are in the same

Covenant with their Parents, and not another, if it give Pardon to the Parents, it doth so also to the Child, of whom no Condition is required, but that he be offered by a believing Parent to God; whose Acceptance is Salvation.

§. 17. Therefore I think that the Synod of Dort truly conclude, Act. 1. 17. That faithful Pa∣rents need not doubt of the Election and Salvation of their Children dying in infancy: The Covenant cer∣tainly pardoneth and saveth them.

§. 18. But this is not only because they are born of their Bodies, nor yet is their Faith the efficient Cause of it; but there are two things go to qua∣lifie the Receiver as the dispositive Condition, that is, 1. That he be the Child of a faithful Parent, who devote••h himself sincerely to God. 2. And that he be by the Parent devoted to God, by Consent, that he be in the mutual Covenant: Which virtually all the Faithful do that have Infants, because they devote themselves and theirs to God to the utmost of their Capacity. And the Recipient Sub∣ject being thus qualified, God▪, Covenant pardoneth him, as the efficient Instrument, by signifying God's Will.

§. 19. Though the Promise here be not so plain, I deny not, that all true Propriet••rs, whose own the Child is, here be as Parents.

§. 20. God having not made the Case of Infants so plain to us as our own, that are Adult, there are difficult Objections against this way; but as it seems to me, much more against all the rest.

§. 21. The grand Objection is, That then some Infants lose a state of Salvation when they come to age. Ans▪ This will follow; but far ha••der

things from all the rest: But, 1. This was thought no Absurdity for a Thousand years after the Apo∣stles, when I cannot prove, that any one man thought that none of the Adult themselves fall away from true Sanctification and right to Life: When even Augustine the famous Defender of Election and Grace against Pelagius, thought that all the Elect only persevered, and that more were justified and sanctified than were Elect, and that the rest all fell away. 2. Davenant answereth this, That Infant-grace may be lost, and yet not the Grace of the Adult: Because it is but a Relative Regeneration, and an Extrinseck Remission of Sin, that giveth them Right to Impunity and Life, or if they are said to have the Spirit, it is not in a fixed Habit of Grace. If you say, They cannot be saved without real Holiness, I an∣swer;

§. 22. 3. Distinguish of Holiness, and of the Season of it. 1. Infants have not actual Faith, nor necessarily a proper Habit, which is a disposition to facile acting that same act: But a semen, a Seed, (as Amesius rather calleth it than a Habit at first even in the Adult:) And Calvin saith, That some men, semen fidei qualecunque perdunt. Adam had such a Holiness as might be lost: And why may we not say, that Infants first▪ Grace is of such a sort or degree? 2. And yet that none are saved without more; but that upon this first degree they have a right to Salvation, and that their fur∣ther Holiness shall be given them whom God will, as part of their Salvation, to which they have right: At furthest, at death, in the same time and manner as perfect Holiness and Mortificati∣on of Sin is given to Believers that are till death

imperfect. A loseable degree of Holiness like Adam's, may be the way to more in all that so die.

§. 23. Divines use to mention three degrees of Grace in order to Faith it self. 1. So much Grace as maketh a man able to believe, (which they call Sufficient Grace.) 2. So much more as efficiently determineth him to the Act of Believing: This they call effectual special Grace, and Protestants call it our Vocation effectual. 3. So much more as giveth him a fixed habit of Faith, Love, and all Holiness to∣gether. This Papists call Iustification, and Prote∣stants Sanctification. Vid. Amesii Medull. de voc. & sanct. Rolloc. de vocat. Bishop Downame against Pemble Append. to his Treatise of Perseve∣rance, &c.

§. 24. Now some hold all these loseable: some hold only the last not loseable; and almost all hold the first loseable. Now, 1. What if we think that Infant's first Holiness, besides relative (Pardon, and jus ad impunitatem & regnum) is but of the first degree? Though a meer moral Power to be∣lieve be not enough to the Adult, because the Act is necessary to them, yet say Pro∣testants,* 1.2 The Habit is not necessary to their first Covenant-Right, but is given by the Spi∣rit in sanctification as a Covenant-Benefit. And why may not Infants be in a pardoned state, that at first have but that Grace which giveth a moral Power to believe when they come to age? Con∣sider of the matter.

§. 25. I have so fully elsewhere* 1.3 proved, That Infants Church-membership

was instituted both in the Covenant of Innocency, in the first edition of the Covenant of Grace; in the Covenant of Peculiarity with Abraham, and in the last edition of the Covenant of Grace by Christ; and also that God never had a Church on Earth, of which Infants were not Members, if the adult Members had Infants, that I will now supersede that Work.

Notes

• * 1.1

  See the full proof in my two Disput. of Original Sin.
• * 1.2

  ☜
• * 1.3

  In two Treatises for Infants Church-membership; and in my Review of Infant-Baptism.