|
Presumptive Regeneration
The quote in Dr. Crampton's book from Paedobaptism
to Credobaptism from pages 115-116 is as follows:
Charles
Hodge was of the opinion that presumptive regeneration must be the
ground for infant baptism. He wrote, "We see not how this principle
[presumptive regeneration] can be denied in its application to the
church without giving up our whole doctrine and abandoning the
ground to the Independents and Anabaptists."
John
Murray is another who erred in this respect. He said:
[There
are] certain principles which lie close to the argument for infant
baptism and without which the ordinance of infant baptism would be
meaningless . . . These principles are: (1) that little
children, even infants are among Christ's people and area members of
His body; (2) that they are members of His kingdom and therefore
have been regenerated; (3) that they belong to the church, in that
they are received as belonging to Christ, that is to say, received
into the fellowship of the saints.
Then
there is the eminent B. B. Warfield. He wrote that "all Protestants
should easily agree that only Christ's children have a right to the
ordinance of baptism." Therefore, he went on to say, baptism is
appropriate for "those for whom we may, on any grounds, fairly
cherish a good presumption that they belong to God's people - and
this surely includes the infant children of believers."
Pierre Marcel is of the
same opinion:
Baptism
given to little children is the witness and attestation of their
salvation, the seal and confirmation of the covenant of grace which
God contracts with them . . Because of the promises of the covenant
sealed by this baptism the parents and the church are strengthened
in the faith which causes them to consider this baby as a child of
God and a lamb in Christ's fold . . . They know that this child is
the heir presumptive of salvation.
. . .
John Calvin's view here
was stranger still. He wrote:
God
declares that He adopts our babies as His own before they are born,
when He promises that He will be our God and the God of our
descendants after us (Genesis 17:7). Their salvation is embraced in
this word. No one will dare be so insolent toward God as to deny
that this promise of itself suffices for its effect.
For an interesting and brief
article on presumptive regeneration check out Wikipedia (Theopedia
does not have any information):
Presumptive Regeneration
*********************************
From Rev. Neal Punt we have the
following:
What follows is the information I have about the Conclusions
of Utrecht:
---------------------------------------
The national synod in the Netherlands, meeting in Utrecht,
declared: "According to the confession of our churches, the
seed of the covenant, by virtue of the promise of God, is to
be considered regenerated and sanctified in Christ, until
the contrary should become evident from their doctrine and
conduct as they grow up"
(Acts,
Article 158).
These 1905 "Conclusions of Utrecht" were adopted by the
Synod of the Christian Reformed Church in North America in
1908. They were challenged from time to time, given an
"official interpretation" by the Synod of 1962, and finally
set aside in 1968.
From the moment of birth Christians view their children
as those whose objective salvation has been accomplished
in Christ. The "Conclusions of Utrecht" [No longer a
binding confessional statement in the CRC.] said that
children of believers are "... held to be regenerated
and sanctified in Christ." The Christian Reformed Synod
said that this phrase was "... not a judgment about the
nature of the child, it indicates the approach the
church should take in leading them to the Lord" (See
Acts of Synod, 1962, pp. 107,109, 145).
********************************
To register what you believe click on the following:
I believe in
presumptive regeneration as a basis for infant baptism.
I do not believe
in presumptive regeneration as a basis for infant baptism.
At the time of the original posting of this material, (64) Reformed
pastors (RCA and CRC) indicated they do not believe in presumptive
regeneration and (29) indicated they do. In hindsight, it
would have been better had it been worded believe in presumptive
regeneration as a basis for the practice of infant baptism.
Thank you for participating in this!
Main Page on Infant Baptism
|