Schaff - History of the Christian Church Vol. 8 - Media Sabda Org

808
ft839 “Tot gentes una cum liberis eorum infantibus.” Inst. III. ch. XXIII. §
7. To this should be added the challenge to Castellio: “Put forth now
thy virulence against God, who hurls innocent babes even from their
mothers’ breast into eternal death.” Calvin here argues e concessis. The
passage has been often distorted. We give it in Latin with the
connection (Opera, IX. 289): “Negas Deo licere nisi propter facinus
damnare quenquam mortalium. Tolluntur e vita innumeri adhuc
infantes. Exsere nunc tuam virulentiam contra Deum, qui innoxios
foetus a matrum uberibus avulsos in aeternam mortem praecipitat.
Hanc blasphemiam, ubi palam detecta est, quisquis non detestabitur,
mihi pro sua libidine maledicat.” In the same way he challenges
Castellio (fol. 289), to explain the admitted fact, that God allows
innocent infants to be devoured by tigers or lions or bears or wolves
(“qui fit ut Deus parvulos infantes a tigribus vel ursis vel leonibus vel
lupis laniari vorarique sineat”). The attempt of Dr. Shields of
Princeton to prove that Calvin believed in the salvation of all infants, is
an entire failure (“The Presbyt. and Ref. Review “ for October, 1890).
ft840 “Decretum quidem horribile fateor.” This famous expression is often
ignorantly applied to the whole doctrine of predestination, while Calvin
only uses it of the decree of reprobation. The decree of election is
glorious and most comforting. There is no need, therefore, of
moderating the term horribile, which means horrible, terrible.,
dreadful. In French he calls it “ce décret qui nous doit espouvanter,” a
decree which should terrify us. Hase (Kirchengeschichte, Ill. I. 196)
says: “Calvin ist ein dogmatischer Dante: dieselbe grauenvolle Lust,
die Majestaet Gottes auch in der Hoelle anzuerkennen und zu preisen,
diese grauenvolle Macht, welche fuehlende Wesen geschaffen hat zu
ewiger Qual.”
ft841 “They condemn the Anabaptists, who disapprove the baptism of
children, and affirm that children are saved without baptism.” The
edition of 1540 adds after “baptism” “et extra ecclesiam Christi,”
which must refer to heathen infants. The German text omits the clause
and condemns the Anabaptists simply for rejecting infant baptism. This
shows that Melanchthon was in doubt on the subject of infant
damnation.
ft842 “Abhorremus et detestamur ... crudele judicium contra infantes sine
baptismo morientes.”