IV. I proposed in the last place, to subjoin a few inferences which naturally follow from the preceding observations.
1. And, _first_, It follows, that baptism is not the new birth: they are not one and the same thing. Many indeed seem to imagine, they are just the same: at least, they speak as if they thought so: but I do not know, that this opinion is publickly avowed, by any denomination of Christians whatever. Certainly it is not, by any within these kingdoms, whether of the established church, or dissenting from it. The judgment of the latter is clearly declared, in their [7]_large Catechism_: _Q._ “What are the parts of a sacrament? _A._ The parts of a sacrament are two: The one, an outward and sensible sign; the other, an inward and spiritual grace thereby signified. _Q._ What is baptism? ♦_A._ Baptism is a sacrament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water, to be a sign and seal of regeneration, by his Spirit.” Here it is manifest, baptism, the sign, is spoken of as distinct from regeneration, the thing signified.
In the church-catechism likewise the judgment of our church is declared with the utmost clearness. “What meanest thou by this word, sacrament? I mean an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace. What is the outward part, or form in baptism? Water wherein the person is baptized, in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. What is the inward part or thing signified? A death unto sin, and a new birth unto righteousness.” Nothing therefore is plainer, than that according to the church of _England_, baptism is not the new birth.
But indeed the reason of the thing is so clear and evident, as not to need any other authority. For what can be more plain, than that the one is an external, the other an internal work? That the one is a visible, the other an invisible thing, and therefore wholly different from each other: the one being an act of man, purifying the body; the other, a change wrought by God in the soul. So that the former is just as distinguishable from the latter, as the soul from the body, or water from the Holy Ghost.
2. From the preceding reflections, we may, _secondly_, observe, that as the new birth is not the same thing with baptism, so it does not always accompany baptism: they do not constantly go together. A man may possibly be _born of water_, and yet not be _born of the Spirit_. There may sometimes be the outward sign, where there is not the inward grace. I do not now speak with regard to infants: it is certain, our church supposes, that all who are baptized in their infancy, are at the same time born again. And it is allowed, that the whole office for the baptism of infants proceeds upon this supposition. Nor is it an objection of any weight against this, that we cannot comprehend, how this work can be wrought in infants? For neither can we comprehend, _how_ it is wrought in a person of riper years. But whatever be the case with infants, it is sure all of riper years who are baptized are not at the same time born again. _The tree is known by its fruits_: and hereby it appears too plain to be denied, that divers of those who were children of the devil before they were baptized, continue the same after baptism: _for the works of_ their _Father they do_; they continue servants of sin, without any pretence either to inward or outward holiness.