infant baptismal regeneration: whose faith?

I am currently digging into Anglican teaching on baptism (I have unbaptized little ones so this is not a light matter to me…) and I am trying to understand baptismal regeneration in light of salvation by grace through faith.

The BCP famously states “this child is regenerate”, and although I have read Bishop Ryle about the principle of charitable supposition (i.e., such statements are said out of a judgment of charity, generally, and not as guarantees of every individual infant’s regeneration), nonetheless it is clear to me that the Prayer Book accepts that God may regenerate—indeed, usually does regenerate—an infant in his baptism.

So my question is: since one is saved by grace (given in baptism) that is received through faith, whose faith is involved in the infant’s receiving grace and being born again?

I am trying to distinguish the view assumed by the Prayer Book from the Lutheran view, for example as expressed on the LCMS website:

“Baptism, we believe, is one of the miraculous means of grace (together with God's written and spoken Word) through which God creates the gift of faith in a person's heart.

“Although we do not claim to understand how this happens or how it is possible, we believe (because of what the Bible says about Baptism) that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant.”

(my emphasis added)

Would this loosely match the* Anglican understanding? If parents (as Ryle seems to suggest), in faith, bring their infant for baptism, then God regenerates the infant on the basis of his parents’ faith (and gives the child his own faith)?

Forgive the doubtless stupid question. But almost every attempt I’ve seen to explain this seems to imply that “the infant can’t really be regenerated in any case, that can only come later when he’s old enough to make his own decision” on the one hand, or “the infant is regenerate on condition that he one day makes his own decision” on the other. Neither satisfies me…


* I am aware that there is a range of Anglican understandings. Let me just say that I mean: in keeping with the 39 Articles and BCP. Or to put it negatively : not a modern-day Baptist “ordinance not sacrament” understanding.

 

27. Of Baptism.
Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it is also a sign of Regeneration or New-Birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed, Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God.
The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.

Bear it in mind that what follows is not officially the opinion of the Anglican Church, only the opinion of one Anglican minister (LLM). Admittedly an LLM with a particular interest in the validity of Christian baptism generally and Christian infant baptism in particular, in the Anglican church.

"Whose faith is involved in the infant's receiving grace and being born again."?

The meaning of the word grace has a different connotation in the Anglican denomination than it does in the Roman Catholic denomination, and the concept of being born again has a different connotation than is used in the Baptist denomination. We Anglicans use the word Grace among other things to describe the way God has extended mercy in an unmerited way to the whole human race, through the merits of Jesus Christ the Righteous. It is an attibute of the character of God. Also, as an Anglican I believe it is possible to be 'born again' without even knowing it. I think Nicodemus may have been, and even though Jesus was suggesting that Nicodemus was where he was and asking the kind of questions that indicated he already had been, he still didn't understand what it entailed.

God is gracious and God's grace was extended to the human race through the death of God's only Son Jesus Christ. God was in Christ upon the cross, reconciling the world to Himself. This in effect is the Gospel

As individuals we each cannot comprehend God's Grace to usward without FAITH in God - - and saving faith comes through hearing and comprehending the Gospel and believing The Word of God, who is The Christ.

An assurance of salvation can only result from personal understanding of the Gospel of Grace. Anything else would be merely a presumption, not an assurance.

Bearing these considerations in mind, the answer to your question, in my opinion is: It is the faith primarily of the church doing the baptism of the infant which validates its efficacy. Added to that is the faith of the parents and godparents of the infant, then that, however nascent that may be, in the infant itself.

Adults are baptised only after the church ascertains from them the fact that they trust in Christ for their salvation and that they "Turn to Christ", meaning they owe allegiance and obedience to Him as their Lord.
Infants are unable at the time of their baptism to declare anything of the sort but infant baptism is not administered in their case on the basis of their own testimony. Even adults do not 'choose Christ', - Christ 'chooses' them.

Infants are baptised on the understanding that their parent(s) have already been chosen by Christ so they therefore have a covenant with God that God will be the God of their children also.

Their children already belong to God and have been given to Christ. St Paul reasons their children, (the offspring of baptised regenerate parents), are already counted as 'Holy' by God, from the moment of their conception. That is; set apart, already belonging to God to serve Christ and keep their Covenant obligations which they and their parents have undertaken in God's service.

Baptism, in my opinion, confers upon the infant of a covenant covered believer, the sign and seal of God's favour, as a full member of Christ's Church. It also signals a solemn pledge of God that the infant will, at some time in their life, be conscious of being circumcised of heart as they live and grow in increasing knowledge of The Lord and will, at some time, willingly accept God's sovereignty over them and appreciate God's compassionate care and nurture. God's promises can be trusted to come to pass. So the infant is entitled to receive the sign and seal of a Christian Profession.

By faith, the church, (and the parents as members of it), believe this potential regeneration of the individual infant can be believed to have already taken place, in the eternal sphere of God's will.

To those who might object to the idea that such great salvation can appear to be imposed upon an unsuspecting infant, I would say this. How can salvation be regarded as an 'imposition', as if it might be inflicting some sort of impediment upon the recipient? God has not taken a right of 'choice' from the child. God has graceously bestowed a gift upon it. The gift of an assured salvation. Does the infant have a 'choice' over the nationality it receives at birth? Can a tiny infant choose what parents it has been given, without its consent, what education it will at first receive, who shall administer its sustenance and discipline? In view of all this how can anyone believe they are entitled to have a choice by right, over who shall be their Saviour and when?

As infants hopefully, naturally grow, mature and become fully autonomous adults, they will be offered opportunity by the church, (which took their baptismal vows on their behalf), as 'Godparents', to personally reaffirm, (or even reject), those baptismal vows THEMSELVES, at Confirmation, (i.e. to accept their great salvation or conversely to neglect or refuse it - it is a gift, after all). Confirmation is where and when the continued indwelling of The Holy Spirit will be confirmed and a further assurance of God's grace, in Christ will be imparted to them in their own right along with recognition of the church, of their continued fellow membership, as disciples of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour.

So, in adult baptism it is the faith of the individual in God's Grace that immediately effects the efficacy of baptism but in infant baptism it is the faith of the church, (in the parents, God parents and congregation) initially, that effects the efficacy of baptism, in the eternal will of God in the moment of baptism, and in the infant's life eventually, by a personal faith in God's omnipotent will and His stated promises in scripture. Circumcision of the heart may be yet to take place in the life of the infant but has already been promised by God in eternity, so can be assured for those who believe God keeps His promises, it shall inevitably and surely take place in time, in the heart of the baptised individual concerned, in God's good time.