Geoffrey William Bromiley, Ph.D.: " "Thomas Cranmer, Theologian:" Ch. 5:...

5. Holy Baptism, 57-68. Dr. Bromiley long-talks the issue, but basically tells us that understanding Dr. Cranmer's baptismal theology requires collecting dispersed fragments and putting the puzzle together. Cranmer, of course, was not an Anabaptist, but argued from Augustine, John 3.5, other texts, circumcision, the Abrahamic covenant, Christ's invitation to children, and St. Paul, e.g. 1 Cor. 7.14 (we'd add, as did Zwingli and Bullinger throughout 1525 with the Swiss Anabaptists). Cranmer concludes that "by these, and many other plain words of scripture, it is evident that the baptism of infants is grounded upon the holy scriptures” (PS, II, 60ff.) Gardiner, ever-the-Schoolman and curmudgeonly lawyer, argued--a typical game--or baptismal regeneration and baptismal justification with penance and other meritorious backups and stopgap measures for losses post-baptismally of regeneration and the flip-flops of justification, still a Roman and Tractarian game in our time. Dr. Cranmer also came at baptism through the question of the Eucharist—Christ’s full Presence, Incarnate, Risen, and Ascended in His plenipotent Presence. Basically, Chalcedonianism for infant baptism. Baptism externally bespeaks, teaches and exhibits the "sign and pledge," pointing to the Reality and the redemptive benefits, made effectual by Christ Himself. It all sounds like standard WCF-theology and the 1850 CoE Gorham decision, but we can’t use those later tools to understand Cranmer. It's bad history. But, the seminal seeds planted make for trees later in English church history. Some call it “receptionism.” Faith is connected and created by the Redeemer. Without faith, the Reality is not apprehended. In infants, the seed is planted and produces the fruit tree under the Redemptive Person. While not saying it, Dr. Bromiley may hint at election and predestination functioning in Cranmer’s awareness. The game needs to be upped here. Dr. MacCulloch claims that Cranmer connected predestination and baptism by 1550, the first shaping and controlling the later. Elect infants get the package internally while, like Esau, the others are externalist who missed the train of faith. We get some more long-talking about being “sacramentally regenerate,” having the sign for all, but only the reality, the “truly regenerate,” for those who have faith. Again, Dr. Bromiley snoozes about predestination. We hear some about the Spirit of Christ and an alleged inclination to Nestorianizing Christology. ??. Yeah, yeah, we've heard that before from the Lutherans. Newmann called him a Monophysite, that morbid, apostate and indecent Oxfordian. Thankfully, we hear of Cranmer’s consciousness to avoid the Roman, Tractarian and, yes, the Lutheran’s necessary and inescapable ex opere operato. And yes, have heard Confessional Lutherans choke on that. This ain't the first rodeo on these issues. Glad to move on from this unhelpful chapter. The next chapter will be the big one: "The Eucharistic Presence," a mountain upon which Dr. Cranmer died.