Philosophical Theology

In Chapter 14 of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), saving faith is distinguished from believing. This distinction, which has implications with respect to infants and those who might suffer from cognitive impairment, is made plain when the standards teach it is by the grace of faith that the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls. (WCF 14.1) Moreover, in WCF 14 we read:

By this faith, a Christian believes to be true whatsoever is revealed in the word…

WCF 14.2

WCF 14.1 does not teach that by the grace of faith a Christian is enabled to have faith. Nor do the standards teach in WCF 14.2 that by this faith the Christian has faith. Rather, the Confession recognizes that the gift of faith is not the same thing as exercising faith in the act of believing. Similarly, the grace of repentance in the Westminster standards is distinguished from the acts of repentance.

Repentance unto life is an evangelical grace, the doctrine whereof is to be preached by every minister of the Gospel, as well as that of faith in Christ. By it [i.e., the gift of repentance], a sinner, out of the sight and sense not only of the danger, but also of the filthiness and odiousness of his sins… hates his sins, as to turn from them all unto God, purposing and endeavoring to walk with Him in all the ways of His commandments.

WCF 15.1.2

It is by the the gift of repentance that sinners are enabled to turn from their sin in specific acts of repentance. This is analogous to acts of believing flowing out of the one time gift of faith.

Given this unavoidable nuance, we can understand that when an adult Christian is sleeping, suffers from severe cognizant impairment, or becomes unconscious by slipping into a coma, the saint is not without the implanted gifts of faith and repentance even if he can no longer exercise those gifts in believing or turning in faith. However, unlike with infants who also can have dormant gifts of faith and repentance, such adults have volitionally received and rested in Christ alone. Infants have not.

By parsing (a) gifts of faith and repentance alongside of (b) the resultant acts of believing and repenting, we can now better consider justifying faith in elect infants. 

We just saw that it is by the grace of repentance and faith that sinners are enabled to repent and believe. Moreover, like the grace of repentance, the gift of faith is also a necessary and immediate result of regeneration. Which is to say, no regenerate person (even an infant) is without a new and irrevocable nature that possesses the newborn capacity (or propensity) to respond to the gospel in turning and trusting. Added to this, the standards correctly teach that “elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who works when, and where and how he pleases…” In such cases, the outward call that effects the inward call unto regeneration is bypassed, which God is free to do.

Putting this together:

We are safe to infer that if God can regenerate elect infants who die in infancy, he is free to regenerate elect infants who don’t. (Whether that is normative for elect covenant children is not my concern quite yet.) It is also safe to infer that all regenerate infants are granted the seeds of repentance and faith (even without the cognitive ability to willfully turn and trust), lest there can be new creations in Christ, indwelled by the Holy Spirit, who do not have the grace of new life that is accompanied by the propensity to repent and believe the gospel. Notwithstanding and, also, per the Westminster standards, effectual calling (as a matter of definition) entails knowledge of Christ and his work, whereby sinners become effectually and cognizantly persuaded of the need to embrace the Savior.

Bypassing the outward call:

Lest we redefine soteriological terminology (or assume a magical or incantational view of the ministry of the Word), we should confidently maintain that infants cannot possess true saving knowledge. Nonetheless, God can implant the seeds of repentance and faith, saving infants through the monergistic work of regeneration. So, although the outward call can result in an inward and effectual call that necessarily and immediately results in (a) regeneration, (b) repentance and (c) trust – it is no less true that regeneration in the life of covenant infants can occur apart from being outwardly called as the Spirit “works when, and where, and how he pleases”. (John 3:8; WCF 10:3)

By the monergistic work of the Spirit, recreated infants have their hearts subdued and wills renewed in the respective gifts of repentance and faith. Accordingly, only through the rebirth are sinners spiritually enlightened with an implanted tendency to turn from self and rely upon Christ. Notwithstanding, the standards are equally clear that the principal acts of receiving and resting in Christ are preceded by gospel comprehension and intellectual assent, which is a result of the outward call that must be understood before it can be volitionally embraced. Infants are incapable of this.

Justification:

Because faith and repentance can be distinguished from their associated acts of believing and turning, it is appropriate to read other sections with that in mind.

Those who God effectually calls, He also freely justifies, not by infusing righteousness in to them…nor by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness…

WCF 11.1

It is reasonable to interpret the Confession as not defining “faith itself” as “the act of believing” (lest WCF 11 contradicts WCF14!), but rather again distinguishing faith from the act of believing, just as it distinguishes faith from “evangelical obedience”. In other words, the Confession teaches that God does not credit either (a) faith, (b) the act of believing, or (c) any other evangelical obedience to the sinner when he is pardoned and accounted righteous in Christ.

Where things get difficult:

Reformation 21 has posited a kind of already not yet aspect to union with Christ that begins with regeneration and is consummated in “ultimate union” through faith in Christ. Although the Spirit can take up residence in a person and unite him to the risen Savior, justification can only occur by laying hold of Christ through actually believing. With this order of salvation in place, “actual union” gives way to “mutual union”, without which justification, adoption and peace with God cannot obtain.

The difficulty with this view is that it makes justification a placeholder in the ordo salutis. It implies that an infant can be “regenerated, and saved by Christ” without being justified in God’s sight. The problem is that justification is more than a word but a word with theological meaning! By considering the import of justification is to invite the question, what is Spirit wrought union with Christ without forgiveness and righteousness in Christ (or spiritual adoption for that matter)? Can one be baptized into Christ without receiving the justifying benefits of Christ? Can an elect infant who dies in infancy be united to Christ in salvation without being forgiven?

However, if regenerate infants can be justified without having yet exercised the habit of faith they possess, then justification can for a time be without intellection and volition, though never separated from the grace of the seed of faith.* (What does not seem to be a sensible position is that infants can understand the propositions of the gospel and trust in Christ for salvation.)**

Personal reflections on what is normative:

Although I am of the mind that it is normative for elect covenant children to be born again and brought forth as the fruit of the new creation by the intelligible Word that is accompanied by even minimal understanding, whenever the Word raises sinners unto life it is always accompanied by the operative work of the Spirit who is free to work apart from the comprehended Word in the experience of infants. (John 3:8; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23) Surely, it is plain vanilla Reformed doctrine that God can regenerate covenant children in the womb or even at the font (even if it is not normative), but those who have been united to Christ in this way shall surely come to receive and embrace the teachings of Scripture, in particular the person and work of Christ, all in God’s appointed time. We can expect this to occur early in the regenerate child’s experience. 

Closing: 

Sinners are saved through the instrumental cause of faith so that our salvation might be all of grace. That an infant can be spiritually united to Christ without being forgiven and declared righteous in the Son is a position that conflicts with the view that justification, for a relatively brief time, is necessarily present in regeneration yet without the acts of faith and repentance in the life of covenant infants (though not without the graces of repentance and faith).

Personally, my view is that pardon in Christ cannot be severed from union with Christ. Consequently, a regenerate child who has not yet exercised the seed of faith is no less forgiven in Christ. Notwithstanding, we need not deny that something is yet still lacking in the conversion transaction. I don’t believe that what is “not yet” pertains to justification (or adoption) but conscious peace with God through a spiritual relationship that cannot begin to blossom apart from acknowledging guilt, repenting from sin, and volitionally embracing the love of God in Christ. Indeed, our covenant children must close with Christ, upon which the assurance of salvation through a good conscience toward God can be established and new life enjoyed!

*For some, the idea of habitus fidei might not be happiest of terms. Potentia fidei might be better. The point, however, is to contrast actus fidei, which requires the three classic elements of faith: notitia, assensus, and fiducia, with the seed of faith, noting that fiducia as the crowning element of cognitive faith (trust) pertains to actus voluntatis, whereas the first two elements (knowledge or understanding, and assent) pertain to actus intellectus.

**We might be tempted to liken an infant’s trust in her mother to her trust in Christ. However, that would seem to overlook that in the former sense there is an obvious object of knowledge, the mother’s touch etc. In the latter sense, that which reveals Jesus is none other than special revelation contained in Scripture, which must be comprehended through cognitive faculties. 

With respect to John the baptizer leaping in his mother’s womb, such can easily be attributed to having been regenerated but not so obviously attributed to possessing notitia and assenus, let alone fiducia.