These are the chief effects when valid baptism has been administered to those who are duly qualified by repentance and faith to receive it. But what is the result when these two sets of con- ditions are separateil ? There is the case of those who are qualified, but are not baptized. And there is the case of those who are baptizeil, but are not qualified. Simon Magus is an example of the latter. In Scripture there is no certa,in instance of the former, nor any express statement respecting such. But the solution afterwards reached throws light on scriptural language, and may be briefly mentioned here.
It was universallj' held that a catechumen who was mart\Ted before baptism was a meiiiber of Christ. His 'baptism of blood' supplied the de- li ioncy. But a catechumen who was willing to sutler for the faith, and yet died without martyrdom or hnptism,. seemed to be equallyamember of Christ; as Ambrose contends (/)e vhitii Valcnt. Consul. ,52; Migne, xvi. 137.5). This led to a general concession that the faithful unbaptized may possess the sub- stance of regeneration before baptism ; and this involved a modification of the doctrine as to the actual effect of baptism upon the faithful recipient. As early as TertulHan we find the admission : Laimcrum illud est obngnatio fdei ; mta: Jidci a pcenitentim fide incipitur et commendatur. Non idco ahlitimur ut dc/inmiere dcsinmjius, (pioniainjam torde liiti tunms (De Pan. vx.). I?aptism is a seal (ff^pa^/s, signanilum). The metaphor was used of circumcision (Ro 4"), and was very early trans- ferred to baptism (?2 Co Y^, ? Rev 9*): see reff. in Suicer, s.v. and in Lightfoot, Clem. Rom. ii.
226. A seal makes a document formally com- plete ; but the document may be binding without It. And if before baptism jaj» corde loti sumus, what is this but regeneration ? Nevertheless, to regard baptism as a mere form which may be neglecteil with impunity would be arrogant dis- obedience, like the first attitude of Naaman towards Elislia ; and such disobedience would be evidence that the inward justification had not taken place. An unbaptized believer is like a t«stator who has made a will but has not signed it. He may die without signing it. If it is clear that he had full intention of signing, and was merely waiting for suitable witnesses, the will may be accepted as a valid expression of his wishes. But if he has post- poned the signature indefinitely, the presumption IS thai he was not decided as to his intentions. It is the contempt of baptism when it may be had, not the lack of it when it may not, that is perilous.
The case of Simon Magus is very different. He was baptized without repentance and faith. Was that a mere empty form ? By no means. He was admitted to the Christian body, and received the baptismal character. The technical name for such a person was Fictus, i.e. one who received baptism unworthily. And it was held from the first that God always does His part in the baptismal contract, whether the baptized can avail himself of it or no. The grace which the Fictics, through unworthiness, could not receive at the time of baptism, was always ready for him when repentance and faith made him worthy. He had ceased to be a heatlien, and had received a Christian title, which could be made good by change of heart. This doctrine follows of necessity from the doctrine that baptism is ";enerally necessary, and yet may not be repeated. Otlierwise, the case of the unworthy recipient would be hopeless. His first baptism would be without effect ; and he may not have a second. But it is because liis baptism has done all that is required, if only he makes himself capable of profiting by it, that lie may not have it repeated. Simon is ex- horted to repent, not witli a view to a second baptism, but to the forgiveness which would have been his had his baptism been worthily received, and which may still be won (Ac 8~). When whole tribes were baptized at once, baptism with- out the necessary repentance and faith must have been common. But this defect was not irreparable ; and meanwhile the baptized had a title to spiritual blessings which could be appropriated by change of heart.
Mutatis mutandis the same principle may hold respecting the baptism of infants. At baptism the infant receives remission of the guilt of original sin, admission to the Christian community, and a title to heavenly gifts to be appropriated afterwards. Scriptural doctrine refers to the baptism of adults who are qualified by repentance and faith. The application of that doctrine to infants is an un- certain inference ; and we must be cautious in drawing it. Caution is also required in estimating the statements of Christian writers of the first three centuries respecting baptismal regeneration. We must consider two points especially. (1) Is the writer speaking of the baptism of adults or of that of infants ? With us, if nothing is said to the con- trary, Iiaptism commonly means infant baptism. Early Christian writers would almost always have the baptism of adults in their minds. (2) Ifn what sense does he use the word ' regeneration ' ? Some- times it is a mere sj-nonjTu for the fact of baptism. In Scripture every Christian is hj-pothetically a saint : anil so every baptized person is hypothetic- ally regenerate. It is assumed that the baptism has been in all respects complete. In this sen>e, to call an infant ' regenerate ' may mean no more than