Publication date
11/1/00
Volume
21
Number
21
The WatchTower
Views From the Watch Tower
The Watchtower Magazines
../literature/watchtower/1900/21/1900-21-1.html
 
 
VOL. 
XXI 
ALLEGHENY, 
PA., 
NOVEMBER 
1, 
1900 
No. 
21 
VIEWS 
FROM 
THE 
WATCH 
TOWER 
STILL 
DEBATING 
INFANT 
DAMNATION 
In 
debates 
on 
creed 
revision 
among 
Presbyterians 
no 
feature 
has 
called 
forth 
such 
heated 
discussion 
as 
that 
re­ 
latmg 
to 
"elect 
infants 
dying 
in 
infancy." 
This 
clause 
of 
the 
'Vestminster 
Confession, 
with 
those 
clause£ 
which 
have 
pop­ 
ularly 
been 
taken 
as 
interpreting 
it, 
follow:- 
III. 
3. 
"By 
the 
decree 
of 
God, 
for 
the 
manifestation 
of 
his 
glory, 
some 
men 
and 
angels 
are 
predestmed 
unto 
ever­ 
lasting 
life, 
and 
others 
foreordained 
to 
everlasting 
death. 
III. 
4. 
"These 
angels 
and 
men 
thus 
predestmed 
and 
fore­ 
ordained 
are 
particularly 
and 
unchangeably 
designed, 
and 
their 
number 
is 
so 
certain 
and 
definite 
that 
It 
can 
not 
either 
be 
increased 
or 
diminished. 
"The 
Lutheran 
church 
did 
not 
rid 
itself 
altogether 
of 
Roman 
sacramentalism. 
Its 
Augsburg 
Confession 
teaches 
that 
'Baptism 
is 
necessary 
to 
salvation.' 
It 
condemns 
all 
'who 
affirm 
that 
children 
are 
saved 
without 
baptism.' 
"Archbishop 
Cranmer, 
the 
first 
primate 
of 
the 
English 
church, 
said 
in 
his 
'Catechism': 
'If 
we 
should 
have 
heathen 
parents 
and 
die 
without 
baptism, 
we 
would 
be 
damned 
ever­ 
lastingly.' 
" 
. 
. 
. 
. 
The 
founder 
of 
the 
Methodist 
Episcopal 
church, 
John 
Wesley, 
in 
his 
'Treatise 
on 
Baptism,' 
1756, 
says:- 
"'If 
infants 
are 
guilty 
of 
original 
sin, 
then 
they 
are 
the 
proper 
subjects 
of 
baptism, 
seeing 
in 
the 
ordinary 
way 
they 
can 
not 
be 
saved 
unless 
this 
be 
washed 
away 
by 
baptism. 
It 
has 
already 
been 
proved 
lhat 
this 
original 
stain 
cleaves 
to 
every 
child 
of 
man, 
and 
that 
they 
thereby 
are 
children 
of 
wrath 
and 
liable 
to 
eternal 
damnation.''' 
'l'he 
Independent 
(August 
30) 
says:- 
"It 
is 
a 
mere 
eyasion 
to 
assert 
that 
'elect 
infants' 
can 
mean 
all 
infants. 
It 
would 
be 
as 
easy 
to 
say 
'all 
infants', 
as 
'elept 
infants' 
if 
that 
'Yare 
intended. 
and 
if 
it 
were 
not 
contu· 
dicted 
by 
the 
doctrine 
clearly 
expressed 
in 
the 
Confession. 
that 
original 
sin 
i'5 
worthy 
of 
eternal 
death. 
That 
the 
plain 
meaning 
of 
the 
Confession 
and 
its 
implications 
throu)!hout 
in­ 
cludes 
infants 
among 
those 
who 
are 
lost, 
is 
sufficiently 
proYed 
from 
the 
lan~age 
of 
Dr. 
Twiss, 
prolol'utor 
of 
the 
"-estminster 
AssC'mbly, 
who 
says 
distinctly 
in 
IllS 
'VrxDIc:r:' 
I. 
-lR 
- 
"'Many 
infants 
depart 
from 
this 
life 
in 
original 
sin, 
and 
consequently 
are 
condemned 
to 
eternal 
death 
on 
account 
of 
original 
sin 
alone. 
Therefore. 
from 
the 
sole 
transgression 
of 
Adam 
condemnation 
to 
eternal 
death 
has 
followed 
upon 
many 
infants.' 
"What 
Dr. 
Twiss 
said 
was 
the 
belief 
of 
the 
rest 
amI 
the 
teaching 
of 
the 
Confession." 
The 
Rev. 
Henry 
Frank 
quotes 
John 
Calvin 
himself, 
saying:- 
"John 
Calvin 
savs 
with 
his 
accustomed 
clearness: 
'The 
children 
of 
the 
repr~bate 
[i 
Coo 
the 
non-elect] 
whom 
the 
cune 
of 
God 
follows, 
are 
~ubieet 
to 
the 
sa.me 
sentencC" 
(Oppra 
II.) 
Again: 
'You 
deny 
that 
it 
is 
lawful 
for 
God, 
expept 
for 
mis­ 
deeds, 
to 
condemn 
any 
human 
being. 
. 
.. 
Put 
forth 
your 
evidence 
against 
God. 
who 
precipitates 
into 
eterllal 
dCflth 
harmless, 
new-born 
children 
torn 
from 
their 
mother's 
bosom.' 
('De 
Occulta 
Dei 
ProVidentia'). 
'As 
the 
eggs 
of 
the 
asp 
are 
de'5ervedly 
crushed, 
and 
serpents 
iust 
horn 
are 
deservedly 
killed, 
though 
they 
have 
not 
yet 
poisoned 
anyone 
with 
their 
bite, 
so 
infants 
are 
justly 
obnoxious 
to 
penalties' 
(Molineaux 
of 
France) 
. 
. 
. 
. 
"Once 
again 
hear 
John 
Calyin: 
'Very 
infant'5 
themselves 
bring 
in 
their 
own 
damnation 
with 
them 
from 
their 
mother's 
womb; 
who. 
although 
th"!y 
have 
not 
yet 
brought 
forth 
the 
fruits 
of 
their 
iniquity, 
yet 
have 
the 
seed 
thereof 
enclosed 
within 
them; 
yea, 
their 
whole 
nature 
is 
a 
certain 
seed 
of 
sin; 
and 
therefore 
it 
can 
not 
be 
otherwise 
than 
hateful 
and 
abom· 
inable 
to 
God.' 
"Now 
let 
us 
learn 
what 
the 
framers 
of 
the 
Confession 
themselves 
said 
concerning 
this 
damnable 
doctrine. 
William 
Twiss: 
'If 
many 
thousands, 
even 
all 
the 
infants 
of 
Turks 
and 
Saracens, 
dying 
in 
original 
sin 
are 
tormented 
by 
him 
in 
hell-fire, 
is 
he 
to 
be 
accounted 
the 
father 
of 
cruelties 
for 
this?' 
For 
a 
vivid 
picture 
of 
the 
disposition 
of 
these 
eternally 
damned 
infants 
by 
this 
mild 
and 
maudlin 
PreSbyterian 
God, 
read 
Samuel 
Rutherford, 
one 
of 
the 
Scotch 
commis'5ioners 
who 
assisted 
in 
framing 
the 
creed. 
'Suppose 
we 
saw 
with 
our 
eyes 
a 
great 
furnace 
of 
fire, 
. 
. 
. 
. 
and 
all 
the 
damned 
as 
lumps 
at 
red 
fire, 
and 
they 
boiling 
and 
louping 
for 
pain 
in 
a 
dungeon 
of 
everlasting 
brimstone, 
and 
the 
black 
and 
terrible 
devils, 
with 
long 
and 
sharp-toothed 
whips 
of 
scorpions 
lashing 
out 
scourges 
on 
them; 
and 
if 
we 
saw 
our 
own 
neighbors, 
brethren, 
sisters; 
yea, 
our 
dear 
children, 
wives, 
fathers, 
mothers, 
swim· 
ming 
and 
sinking 
in 
that 
black 
lake, 
and 
heard 
the 
yelling, 
shouting, 
crying 
of 
our 
young 
ones 
and 
fathers 
... 
.''' 
* 
* 
* 
It 
will 
now 
be 
quite 
in 
order 
for 
some 
very 
conscientious 
Presbyterian 
brother 
to 
tell 
us 
that 
Jolm 
Calvin 
knew 
nothing 
about 
Oalvinism 
anyway; 
or 
to 
assure 
us 
that 
though 
there 
were 
damned 
non-eleet 
infants 
in 
times 
past, 
there 
are 
none 
today, 
though 
God 
and 
his 
Word 
have 
not 
changed 
in 
the 
interim. 
If, 
instead 
of 
saying 
elect 
and 
non-elect 
infants, 
Brother 
Calvin 
had 
said 
the 
children 
of 
the 
non-elect 
are 
damned 
when 
they 
are 
born, 
he 
would 
have 
come 
much 
nearer 
stating 
the 
matter 
truthfully, 
however 
erroneous 
his 
conception 
of 
the 
facts. 
For 
the 
word 
dalMled 
in 
plain 
English 
simply 
signifies 
[2718] 
(323-324) 
X. 
3. 
"Elect 
infantA, 
dying 
in 
infancy, 
are 
regenerated 
and 
saved 
through 
the 
Spirit, 
who 
worketh 
when, 
where, 
and 
how 
he 
plcaseth; 
so 
also 
are 
all 
other 
elect 
persons 
who 
are 
incapable 
of 
being 
called 
by 
the 
ministry 
of 
the 
Word. 
X. 
4. 
"Others, 
not 
elected. 
although 
they 
may 
be 
called 
by 
the 
'Vord 
and 
may 
have 
some 
common 
operatIOns 
of 
the 
Spirit, 
yet 
thcy 
never 
truly 
come 
to 
Christ 
and, 
therefore, 
can 
not 
be 
sa.vceL 
Much 
lcss 
can 
men 
not 
professing 
the 
Christian 
religion 
be 
sawd 
in 
any 
other 
way 
whatsoever, 
be 
they 
never 
so 
diligent 
to 
frame 
their 
lives 
according 
to 
the 
light 
of 
na 
turc, 
and 
the 
law 
of 
that 
religion 
they 
do 
profess; 
and 
to 
asscrt 
and 
maintain 
that 
they 
may, 
is 
vcry 
pernicious 
and 
to 
be 
detested." 
From 
a 
remote 
period 
these 
statements 
have 
been 
pop­ 
ularly 
supposed 
to 
teach, 
by 
implication, 
that 
non-elect 
infants 
dying 
in 
infancy 
are 
damned. 
However, 
the 
recent 
General 
Assembly 
of 
the 
Presbyterian 
church 
(South) 
claimed 
that 
no 
such 
interpretation 
could 
rightly 
be 
put 
upon 
the 
clause, 
and 
refusC'd 
to 
cOIlfnder 
a 
propositIon 
to 
alter 
it. 
For 
instance, 
Dr. 
'Varficld. 
of 
Princeton, 
says, 
"I 
think 
we 
may 
characterize 
the 
interpretation 
of 
Chapter 
X., 
section 
3 
[of 
the 
Westmin­ 
ster 
Confcssion], 
which 
finds 
a 
body 
of 
non-elect 
infants 
dying 
in 
infancy 
implied 
in 
its 
statements, 
as 
one 
of 
the 
most 
astonishing 
pieces 
of 
misrepresentation 
in 
literary 
history." 
Rev. 
Dr. 
Eugene 
Danicl 
also 
asserts 
that 
it 
is 
unjust 
to 
say 
that 
t 
1 
1c 
Confession 
imphcitly 
teachcs 
thc 
damnation 
of 
non· 
elect 
infants. 
He 
points 
out 
that 
it 
teaches 
posiNrely 
the 
sa 
lvation 
of 
elect 
infants, 
but 
makes 
no 
attempt 
whatever 
to 
solve 
the 
Creator's 
intentions 
with 
regard 
to 
non-elect 
infants. 
It 
seems 
peculiar 
indeed 
that 
anyone 
claiming 
to 
believe 
in 
Calvinistic 
predestination 
of 
adults 
could 
dispute 
that 
the 
same 
conditions 
prevailed 
in 
infancy. 
But 
hearken 
to 
other 
interpreters 
of 
the 
'Vestminster 
Confession, 
as 
follows:- 
Rev. 
Dr. 
Horace 
L. 
Singleton 
(The 
Homiletic 
Review, 
Sep­ 
tpmbpr). 
states 
that 
prior 
to 
the 
'VestminRter 
Confession 
all 
of 
Chri'.tendom 
had 
believed 
that 
infants 
dying 
without 
baptism 
are 
rlllmucd, 
but 
that 
Confession 
took 
a 
step 
forward 
in 
aSRPrting 
that 
elect 
infants, 
even 
if 
unbaptized, 
are 
saved. 
He 
sayR:- 
"The 
sacramentarian 
doctrine 
of 
the 
papal 
and 
other 
prel­ 
atical 
churches, 
and 
the 
logical 
conclusion 
of 
Arminianism, 
left 
no 
other 
provision 
for 
infant 
salvation 
than 
baptism. 
To 
dIe 
without 
it 
waR 
to 
he 
lost 
forever. 
This 
detestable 
doctrine 
the 
Confession 
of 
Faith 
was 
designed 
to 
destroy. 
It 
does 
de­ 
stroy 
it. 
The 
Christian 
church 
and 
the 
world 
are 
debtors 
to 
it 
for 
removing 
the 
gloom 
which 
surrounds 
the 
death 
of 
babes. 
The 
ASRembly 
rHvmes 
were 
all 
Calvinists, 
in 
entire 
accord 
with 
the 
second 
Scotch 
Confession, 
which 
on 
this 
subject 
'abhors 
and 
detests 
among 
the 
doctrine'5 
of 
the 
Roman 
Anti­ 
christ 
his 
cruel 
judgment 
against 
infants 
dying 
without 
the 
sacrament.' 
The 
Calvinists 
of 
the 
Westminster 
Assembly 
who 
indorsed 
or 
approved 
that 
Confession, 
would 
surely 
not 
frame 
an 
article 
on 
infant 
salvation 
which 
would 
imply 
that 
any 
dying 
in 
infancy 
were 
without 
the 
pale 
of 
God's 
grace 
and 
redemption. 
So 
they 
made 
provision 
for 
all 
by 
referring 
all 
to 
the 
sovereign 
will 
of 
him 
'who 
worketh 
when 
and 
where 
and 
how 
he 
will.' 
Only 
Calvinistic 
theology 
and 
a 
Calvinistic 
Confession 
can 
say 
that. 
The 
phrase 
contains 
the 
essence 
of 
Calvinism. 
What 
is 
that? 
Why, 
the 
grace 
of 
God 
is 
sovereign 
both 
in 
its 
source 
and 
application. 
"As 
to 
the 
device 
of 
the 
doctrine 
of 
infant 
damnation, 
not 
one 
of 
the 
other 
denominations 
can 
point 
at 
the 
PreSbyterian 
church 
and 
say: 
'Thou 
didst 
it.' 
"The 
Roman 
Catholic 
church 
in 
the 
Council 
of 
Trent 
decreed, 
and 
the 
decree 
still 
stands:- 
" 
'If 
any 
denies 
that 
new-born 
children 
must 
be 
baptized, 
or 
says 
that 
they 
do 
not 
derive 
from 
Adam 
anything 
of 
original 
sin 
which 
makes 
the 
washing 
of 
regeneration 
necessary 
to 
cleanse 
them 
for 
an 
entrance 
into 
everlasting 
life, 
let 
him 
be 
accursed.' 
Vout. XXI ALLEGHENY, PA., NOVEMBER 1, 1900 No. 21 VIEWS FROM THE WATCH TOWER STILL DEBATING INFANT DAMNATION Jn debates on creed revision among Presbyterians no feature has called forth such heated discussion as that relating to “elect infants dying in infancy.” This clause of the Westminster Confession, with those clauses which have popularly been taken as interpreting it, follow:— IlI, 3. “By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, somé men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. Ii]. 4, “These angels and men thus predestined and foreordained are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number is so certain and definite that 1t can not either be increased or diminished. X. 3. “Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved through the Spirit, who worketh when, where, and how he pleaseth; so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being called by the ministry of the Word. NX. 4. “Others, not elected. although they may be called by the Word and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ and, therefore, can not be saved. Much less can men not professing the Christian religion be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the lght of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious and to be detested.” From a remote period these statements have been popularly supposed to teach, by implication, that non-elect infants dying in infancy are damned. However, the recent General Assembly of the Presbyterian church (South) claimed that no such interpretation could rightly be put upon the clause, and refused to consider a proposition to alter it. For instance, Dr. Warfield, of Princeton, says, “I think we may characterize the interpretation of Chapter X., section 3 [of the Westminster Confession], which finds a body of non-elect infants dying in infancy implied in its statements, as one of the most astonishing pieces of misrepresentation in literary history.” Rev. Dr. Eugene Daniel also asserts that it is unjust to say that the Confession imphcitly teaches the damnation of nonelect infants. He points out that it teaches positively the salvation of elect infants, but makes no attempt whatever to solve the Creator’s intentions with regard to non-elect infants. It seems peculiar indeed that anyone claiming to believe in Calvinistie predestination of adults could dispute that the same conditions prevailed in infancy. But hearken to other interpreters of the Westminster Confession, as follows:— Rev. Dr. Horace L. Singleton (The Homilctic Review, September). states that prior to the Westminster Confession all of Christendom had believed that infants dying without baptism are damned, but that Confession took a step forward in asserting that elect infants, even if unbaptized, are saved. He pays:— veThe sacramentarian doctrine of the papal and other prelatical churches, and the logical conclusion of Arminianism, left no other provision for infant salvation than baptism. To die without it was to he lost forever. This detestable doctrine the Confession of Faith was designed to destroy. It does destroy it. The Christian church and the world are debtors to it for removing the gloom which surrounds the death of babes. The Assembly divines were all Calvinists, in entire accord with the second Scotch Confession, which on this subject ‘abhors and detests among the doctrines of the Roman Antichrist his cruel judgment against infants dying without the sacrament.’ The Calvinists of the Westminster Assembly who indorsed or approved that Confession, would surely not frame an article on infant salvation which would imply that any dying in infancy were without the pale of God’s grace and redemption. So they made provision for all by referring all to the sovereign will of him ‘who worketh when and where and how he will.’ Only Calvinistic theology and a Calvinistic Confession can say that. The phrase contains the essence of Calvinism. What is that? Why, the grace of God is sovereign both in its source and application. “As to the device of the doctrine of infant damnation, not one of the other denominations can point at the Presbyterian church and say: ‘Thou didst it.’ “The Roman Catholic church in the Council of Trent decreed, and the decree still stands:— “If any denies that new-born children must be baptized, or says that they do not derive from Adam anything of original sin which makes the washing of regeneration necessary to cleanse them for an entrance into everlasting life, let him be accursed.’ (323-324) facts, [2718] “The Lutheran church did not rid itself altogether of Roman sacramentalism, Its Augsburg Confession teaches that ‘Baptism is necessary to salvation.’ It condemns all ‘who affirm that children are saved without baptism.’ “Archbishop Cranmer, the first primate of the English church, said in his ‘Catechism’: ‘If we should have heathen parents and die without baptism, we would be damned everlastingly.’ “... The founder of the Methodist Episcopal church, John Wesley, in his ‘Treatise on Baptism,’ 1756, says:— “Tf infants are guilty of original sin, then they are the proper subjects of baptism, seeing in the ordinary way they can not be saved unless this be washed away by baptism. It has already been proved that this original stain cleaves to every child of man, and that they thereby are children of wrath and liable to eternal damnation.’ ” The Independent (August 30) says:— “It is a mere evasion to assert that ‘elect infants’ can mean all infants. It would be as casy to say ‘all infants’, as ‘elect infants’ if that were intended. and if it were not contradicted by the doctrine clearly expressed in the Confession, that original sin is worthy of eternal death. That the plain meaning of the Confession and its implications throughout includes infants among those who are lost, is sufficiently proved from the language of Dr. Twiss, prolocutor of the Westminster Assembly, who says distinctly in his ‘Vrnpic.r’ I, 48 — “Many infants depart from this life in original sin, and consequently are condemned to eternal death on account of original sin alone. Therefore. from the sole transgression of Adam condemnation to eternal death has followed upon many infants.’ ‘What Dr. Twiss said was the belief of the rest and the teaching of the Confession.” The Rev. Henry Frank quotes saying :— “John Calvin says with his accustomed clearness: “The children of the reprobate [i e., the non-elect] whom the curse of God follows, are subject to the same sentence’ (Cpera IT.) Again: ‘You deny that it is lawful for God, except for misdeeds, to condemn any human being.... Put forth your evidence against God. who precipitates into efernal death harmless, new-born children torn from their mother’s bosom.’ (‘De Occulta Dei Providentia’). ‘As the eggs of the asp are deservedly crushed, and serpents just born are deservedly killed, though they have not yet poisoned any one with their bite, so infants are justly obnoxious to penalties’ (Molineaux of France). ... “Once again hear John Calvin: ‘Very infants themselves bring in their own damnation with them from their mother’s womb; who, although they have not yet brought forth the fruits of their iniquity, yet have the seed thereof enclosed within them; yea, their whole nature is a certain seed of sin; and therefore it can not be otherwise than hateful and abominable to God.’ “Now let us learn what the framers of the Confession themselves said concerning this damnable doctrine. William Twiss: ‘If many thousands, even all the infants of Turks and Saracens, dying in original sin are tormented by him in hell-fire, is he to be accounted the father of cruelties for this?’ For a vivid picture of the disposition of these eternally damned infants by this mild and maudlin Presbyterian God, read Samuel Rutherford, one of the Scotch commissioners who assisted in framing the creed. ‘Suppose we saw with our eyes a great furnace of fire, .... and all the damned as lumps of red fire, and they boiling and louping for pain in a dungeon of everlasting brimstone, and the black and terrible devils, with long and sharp-toothed whips of scorpions lashing out scourges on them; and if we saw our own neighbors, brethren, sisters; yea, our dear children, wives, fathers, mothers, swimming and sinking in that black lake, and heard the yelling, shouting, crying of our young ones and fathers... .” * * * It will now be quite in order for some very conscientious Presbyterian brother to tell us that John Calvin knew nothing about Calvinism anyway; or to assure us that though there were damned non-elect infants in times past, there are none today, though God and his Word have not changed in the interim. If, instead of saying elect and non-elect infants, Brother Calvin had said the children of the non-elect are damned when they are born, he would have come much nearer stating the matter truthfully, however erroneous his conception of the For the word damned in plain English simply signifies John Calvin himself,

This website uses cookies to improve the website and your experience. By continuing to browse this website, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. If you require further information or do not wish to accept cookies when using this website, please visit our Privacy Policy    Terms of Use    .