But at the Savoy Conference the Puritans, having found
perhaps that a statement which required an explanation,
however familiar and recognized, gave a doctrinal advan-
tage to their opponents, alter their tactics on this subject,
and raise a general objection against the use of this class
of statements in services: “ Whereas through the several
offices the phrase is such as presumes all persons within
the communion of the Church to be regenerated, con-
verted, and in an actual state of grace. ..it cannot be
rationally admitted in the utmost latitude of charity:
we desire that this may be reformed.’’?? Having raised
this general objection, then, against this class of state-
ment, when they come to the particular statement in the
Infant Baptismal Service, they object to that statement
in particular, not because they had not the lhberty to
interpret it hypothetically, but because they objected to
the use of language which required this liberty. ‘“ We
cannot in faith say that every child that is baptized is
‘regenerated by God’s Holy Spirit,’ at least it is a dis-
putable point; and therefore we desire it may be other-
wise expressed.” * It must be remarked that they do not
say that they could not make the statement, but that they
could not make it “in faith,” i.e. with the belief that the
fact was so in the case of every infant. The objection is
not upon the ground, then, that the statement is dogmatic,
in which case they would have absolutely rejected it;
but that as a presumptive statement it is unadvisable.
