# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_September 1863_S261
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Some Remarks on a New Apology of the Reformed Church. 261

"It is an utterly inconceivable thought that in an infant not yet arrived at consciousness a regeneration could have taken place, of which no trace shows itself in the being of the child in the course of its development. The passages John 3:5 and Titus 3:5, often adduced to corroborate the Lutheran doctrine, do not, as the present writer believes he has proven in the theological Studien und Kritiken, refer to baptism at all, and would in any case, if they were mistakenly referred to it, refer not to the baptism of unconscious children but to the baptism of believing adults. That the free grace of God can work the new life even in small children (among whom, however, those of the Baptists must also be included) and does in fact work it in individual cases, is not thereby meant to be denied."

Marginal Remarks: We must note first of all that the Herr Licentiate, had he not wished to fish in troubled waters, should first have set forth the distinguishing character of the Roman and the Lutheran doctrine of baptism and, from a comparison of the two, should have shown that on this point the Lutheran doctrine, as he says, "bears entirely the Roman Catholic character." It almost seems as if the writer excused himself from this demonstration because he saw that it would become evident how far the Lutheran doctrine of baptism is removed from the Roman doctrine — according to which, as is well known, all the sacraments, and hence baptism also, work ex opere operato — as far as heaven is from earth. But that may be forgiven the bold assailant of our Church. Let us examine his grounds against the Lutheran doctrine of baptism. He brings forward three of them. First he says: "It is an utterly inconceivable thought that in an infant not yet arrived at consciousness a regeneration could have taken place." What a poor ground this is scarcely needs proof. The Herr Licentiate will surely grant that regeneration is a divine mystery of grace; it is not an object of comprehending and grasping, but of faith and inward experience. If the regeneration worked in a small, unconscious child is to be denied because it is "an utterly inconceivable thought," then the regeneration of an adult must be denied as well. Or does the reason of the adult perhaps work his regeneration, and does regeneration perhaps cease when a regenerate man sleeps, or when he becomes deranged? Does it not already lie in the very concept of regeneration that man contributes nothing to it? Is it not, then, unreasonable to declare the working of this work in a child's heart — without which, according to Scripture, there is no salvation — impossible, simply because the child can do and contribute nothing to it through its own reason or strength? Did the mothers who brought their infants to Christ, that he might bless them, also hold Roman notions, and did Christ thereby confirm them in this through his outward blessing with the laying on of hands; or was Christ's blessing, perhaps, nothing but an empty ceremony, without any effect on the souls of the children? Does the Herr Licentiate perhaps also not believe that God had already created the first man in his own image, that is, in righteousness before God?