# Two traditions? WCF and CD on infant salvation



## Poimen (Aug 16, 2005)

> CD I.17
> 
> Since we are to judge of the will of God from His Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature, but in virtue of the covenant of grace, in which they together with the parents are comprehended, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom it pleases God to call out of this life in their infancy.





> WCF X.3
> 
> Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.



I was wondering if someone could give me some background to the WCF statement on infant salvation. Specifically, I would like to answer the question: do you think that the CD goes further in its statement than the WCF, and if so, why? 

I get the impression that the WCF is, in a sense, a compromise for those who may have objected to those who would have leaned towards more 'explicit' CD statement. 

Thoughts?


----------



## Poimen (Aug 17, 2005)

Does anyone know of a paper or book written on this subject?


----------



## wsw201 (Aug 17, 2005)

I don't know of any. But if you find one, let me know!


----------



## Larry Hughes (Aug 17, 2005)

Daniel,

I've heard of both statements and wondered the same, but forgotten what is CD?

Thanks,

Larry


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 17, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Larry Hughes_
> Daniel,
> 
> I've heard of both statements and wondered the same, but forgotten what is CD?
> ...



Canons of Dordt


----------



## Larry Hughes (Aug 17, 2005)

Andrew,

Now I feel dumb. Thanks brother. In government work I deal with so many acrynyms so much I loose track of all except of few.

Thanks,

Larry


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 17, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Larry Hughes_
> Andrew,
> 
> Now I feel dumb. Thanks brother. In government work I deal with so many acrynyms so much I loose track of all except of few.
> ...



No prob. There are a lot of acronyms to keep track of. This list may be helpful (but I think CD needs to be added).


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Aug 17, 2005)

I think it should be CoD.


----------



## Poimen (Aug 17, 2005)

Thanks for all the relevant responses guys. 









[Edited on 8-17-2005 by poimen]


----------



## Larry Hughes (Aug 17, 2005)

Sorry Daniel. I was just didn't understand the acrynym to see if I had any books or discussions.



Larry


----------



## Poimen (Aug 17, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Larry Hughes_
> Sorry Daniel. I was just didn't understand the acrynym to see if I had any books or discussions.
> 
> 
> ...



That's all right. I was just joking around.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 17, 2005)

> _Originally posted by poimen_
> Thanks for all the relevant responses guys.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 17, 2005)

> _Originally posted by poimen_
> 
> 
> > CD I.17
> ...



To my shame my background knowledge of the Confessions is only surface level (well, maybe not, my pastor preached through them--or has been preaching through them). My gut hunch is that the CD is more precise (maybe too precise on this) on what is involved in infant salvation and the conditions thereof (if we may call them conditions; granted, I am using bad terminology at the moment). As it stands I would agree with their statement that such infants are indeed elect and going to heaven.

It appears that the Confession gives a truism (one with which I agree), but a wise and necessary one. By placing {at least one} infants in the category of elect, they were able to make a statement allowing for the possibility of infant salvation.

If I can put this into propositonal logic (Pretend the E is inverted):

I=infant
S=salvation/elect

(Ex)(Ix * Sx)

There is the situation that there exists at least one infant and it is elect. 

Now, I cannot logically make the connection that ALL infants who die are elect (but at the same time I cannot make an argument proving that some who die infancy are non-elect). The writers of the Confessions, I believe, were deliberately vague on this because Scripture isn't as clear as we would like it to be (although, it is clear enough for me on this issue).

[Edited on 8--18-05 by Draught Horse]


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Aug 17, 2005)

I prefer the rendering of the WCF, saying that elect infants are saved, but not explaining or attempting to explain which infants are elect and which aren't. The secret things belong to the Lord.


----------

