of late years, however, that I shall need to ask the reader to go with me to the text of the Confession, before I can hope that he will credit my counter-assertion that such an implication is a total misunderstanding of it. Let us observe, then, that we are now dealing with effectual calling, not with election. All questions of election have been settled seven chapters back; and this logically arranged Confession—the careful strictness of the logical arrangement of which has been made a reproach to it—is not a document to rebroach that question at this late and inappropriate point. Let us observe, next, that in the apprehension of the framers of the Confession effectual calling is the first step in the application of redemption to God's elect. To them, and them only, is given this grace. But how? "By His word and Spirit"—and then a rich statement is made as to how this call works in and on them, so as that, though effectually drawn to Jesus, they come most freely and willingly. God's elect, then, are saved through the external call of the word and the internal call of the Spirit conjoined. But what if God's elect die before they are capable of receiving this external call of the word? Are they then lost? No, says Section 3; God's elect that die in infancy are regenerated and saved through the internal work of the Spirit, without the intermediation of the word; and so are all others of the elect who are incapable of receiving such an outward call. Now, observe: There is no such distinction in the minds of the framers of the Confession, at this point, as "elect infants dying in infancy," and "non-elect infants dying in infancy." The distinction in their minds is that between "elect infants that reach the adult state," who are saved by the "word and Spirit," and "elect infants dying in infancy" who are saved by the Spirit apart from the word. This is the antithesis that was in their minds when they wrote this phrase;
