The Condition on which the Efficacy of Baptism is suspended.

That condition is faith. It is the clearly pronounced doctrine of the Lutheran Church that baptism is altogether useless or void of any saving effect, unless the recipient be a believer. And by faith is not meant mere speculative assent, such as Simon Magus bad, but true, living, and saving faith. On these points the Lutheran standards are explicit. In the Larger Catechism, it is said: “Qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit. Hoc est: sola fides personam dignam facit, ut hanc salutarem et divinam aquam utiliter suscipiat. Cum enim hoc in verbis una cum aqua nobis offeratur et proponatur, non alia ratione potest suscipi, quam ut hoc ex animo credamus. Citra fidem nihil prodest baptismus, tametsi per sese cœlestis et inæstimabilis thesaurus esse negari non possit.” And again it is said, “Absente fide, nudum et inefficax signum tantummodo permanet.”¹⁰

From this it follows that in the case of adults, faith and therefore regeneration, must precede baptism. And consequently in their case the design and effect of baptism cannot be to convey the remission of sin and renovation of the heart, but simply to confirm and strengthen a faith already possessed. Thus Gerhard and Baier as quoted above, say:¹¹ “Adultis credentibus principaliter præstat usum obsignationis ac testificationis de gratia Dei,” and “Infantibus quidem æque omnibus per baptismum primum confertur et obsignatur fides, per quam meritum Christi applicatur. Adultis vero illis tantum, qui fidem ex verbo conceperunt ante baptismi susceptionem, baptismus eam obsignat et confirmat.”

With regard to infants Lutherans teach that they have true faith. Gerhard says: “Nos non de modo fidei sumus solliciti, sed in illa simplicitate acquiescimus, quod infantes vere credant.”¹² Chemnitz says: “Nequaquam concedendum est, infantes, qui baptizantur, vel sine fide esse, vel in aliena fide baptizari… . . Aliena quidem vel parentum vel offerentium fides, parvulos ad Christum in baptismo adducit Marc. x. 13, et orat, ut propria fide donentur. Sed per lavacrum aquæ in verbo, Christum Spiritu suo infantibus qui baptizantur, operari et efficacem esse, ut regnum Dei accipiant, non est dubium: licet, quomodo illud fiat, non intelligamus.” Again, “Sicut enim circumcisio etiam parvulorum in V. T. fuit signaculum justitiæ fidei, ita, quia in N. T. infantes baptizati Deo placent, et salvi sunt, non possunt, nec debent inter infideles rejici, sed recte annumerantur fidelibus.”¹³

As the word produces faith in those who hear it, provided they do not resist its influence, so baptism in which the word is embodied (so that it is verbum visibile), produces faith in infants who are incapable of resistance. On this subject Dr. Krauth says: “That this grace is offered whenever baptism is administered, and is actually conferred by the Holy Spirit, whenever the individual receiving it does not present in himself a conscious voluntary barrier to its efficacy. This barrier, in the case of an individual personally responsible, is unbelief. In the case of an infant, there is no conscious voluntary barrier, and there is a divinely wrought receptivity of grace. The objector says, the infant cannot voluntarily receive the grace, therefore grace is not given. We reverse the proposition and reply, the infant cannot voluntarily reject grace, therefore the grace is given. When we speak of a divinely wrought receptivity of grace, we imply that whatever God offers in the Word or element bears with the offer the power of being received. When He says to the man with a withered arm, ‘Reach forth thine arm!’ that which was impossible by nature is made possible by the very word of command. The Word and Sacraments per se break up the absoluteness of the natural bondage; they bring an instant possibility of salvation. Grace is in them so far prevenient that he who has them may be saved, and if he be lost, is lost by his own fault alone.”¹⁴

---

← Chapter 20. The Means of Grace, § 12. Efficacy of Baptism · Contents · Chapter 20. The Means of Grace, § 14. Doctrine of the Church of Rome →

Footnotes

1. Confessio, I. ix. et Apologia, IV. 51; Hase, Libri Symbolici, p. 12 and p. 156. “Quod baptismus puerorum non sit irritus, sed necessarius et efficax ad salutem.” ↩

2. Gerhard, Loci Theologici, XXI. viii. 238; edit. Tübingen, 1769, vol. ix. p. 282. ↩

3. Ibid. p. 284. ↩

4. Romanists, when a child is in imminent peril, baptize it in utero. ↩

5. The Conservative Reformation and its Theology, as represented in the Augsburg Confession, and in the History and Literature of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. By Charles P. Krauth, D. D., Norton Professor of Theology in the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary, and Professor of Intellectual and Moral Philosophy in the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co. 1871, pp. 431. We are sorry to see that Dr. Krauth labours to prove that the Westminster Confession teaches that only a certain part, or some of those who die in infancy, are saved; this he does by putting his own construction on the language of that Confession. We can only say that we never saw a Calvinistic theologian who held that doctrine. We are not learned enough to venture the assertion that no Calvinist ever held it; but if all Calvinists are responsible for what every Calvinist has ever said, and all Lutherans are responsible for everything Luther or Lutherans have ever said, then Dr. Krauth as well as ourselves will have a heavy burden to carry. ↩

6. Catechismus Major, IV. 24, 25; Hase, ut supra, p. 539. ↩

7. Gerhard, ut supra, vol. ix. pp. 148-157. For other Lutheran theologians see Schmid, Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche, Frankfort and Erlangen, 1853. ↩

8. Catechismus Minor, IV. 9, 10; Hase, p. 377. ↩

9. Catechismus Major, IV. 17, 18; Ibid. pp. 537, 538. ↩

10. IV. 33, 34, and 73; Hase, pp. 541, 549. ↩

11. Pages 518, 519. ↩

12. Loci Theologici, XXI. viii. § 230; edit. Tübingen, 1769, vol. ix. pp. 275, 276. ↩

13. Loc. Theol. III. De Baptismo, edit. Frankfort and Wittenberg, 1653, p. 147, b, of third set. ↩

14. The Conservative Reformation and its Theology, p. 439. ↩