the fact that some Calvinists, more obscure than famous, have held the doctrines of infant damnation, reprobation and perdition with frightful rigor." One of those pointed out by Dr. Krauth as holding this doctrine, whom Dr. Shields calls "more obscure than famous," was John Calvin. It is but fair, however, to say that Dr. Shields does not believe that Calvin taught that any infants dying in infancy are lost. He used 17 pages in the Presbyterian and Reformed Review (October, 1890) in an effort to prove his proposition. But his arguments certainly are not convincing.

IX.

Opinions of Some Other Divines.

The supralapsarian divines in the Westminster Assembly were not alone in holding the opinions peculiar to this type of Calvinism. The opinions of a few other divines are subjoined, to show how generally the view prevailed, that some infants dying in infancy are not admitted into heaven.

Richard Baxter, "the chief of English Protestant Schoolmen," who was born in 1615 and died in 1691, says: "After the writing of that book [Plain Scripture Proof of Infants' Church Membership and Baptism], I wrote a postscript against the doctrine of Dr. Burgess and Mr. Thomas Bedford, which I supposed to go on the other extreme; and therein I answered part of a treatise of Dr. Samuel Ward's, which Mr. Bedford published; which proved to be Mr.

'Life and Times, by Orme, Vol. II., pp. 251, 252.

Thomas Gataker's, whom I defend, who is
Dr. Ward's censor; but I knew it not till
Mr. Gataker after told me.
writings, I was greatly in

But, after these

doubt whether

it be not certain that all the infants of true believers are justified and saved, if they die before actual sin. My reason was, because it is the same justifying, saving covenant of grace which their parents and they are in, and as real faith and repentance is that condition on the parents' part which giveth them their right to actual remission, and adoption: so to be the children of such is all the condition which is required in infants, in order to the same benefits; and without asserting this, the advantage of the Anabaptists is greater than every one doth imagine. But I never thought with Dr. Ward that all baptized children had this benefit, and qualitative sanctification also; nor with Dr. Burgess and Mr. Bedford, that all converted at age, had inherent seminal grace in baptism certainly given them; nor with Bishop Davenant, that all justly bap

tized had relative grace of justification and adoption; but only that all the infants of true believers who have right to the covenant and baptism in foro coeli, as well as in foro ecclesiae, have also thereby right to the pardon of original sin, and to adoption, and to heaven, which right is by baptism sealed and delivered to them. This I wrote of to Mr. Gataker who returned me a kind and candid answer, but such as did not remove my scruples; and this occasioned him to print Bishop Davenant's Disputations with his answer. The opinion which I most incline to, is the same which the Synod of Dort expresseth, and that which I conjecture Mr. Davenant meant, or I am sure came next to it."

Mr. Baxter raised the objection,1 “but a parent then can have no more comfort from anie promise of God concerning his child dying than an infidel," to which Mr. Gataker, who was a member of the Westminster Assembly, replied as follows: "It followeth

'How Shall We Revise? p. 105.