Ryle on baptism

Found this on  http://churchsociety.org/publications/tracts/CAT193_RyleBaptism.pdf: (Thanks to Dan Phillips on Team Pyro, once more)


11. But does not St. Paul say in his Epistles that Christians are “buried with Christ in baptism;” and
that baptized persons have “put on Christ”? (Gal. iii. 27; Col. ii. 12.)


No doubt St. Paul says so. But the persons of whom he said this, in all human probability, were not
baptized in infancy, but when they were grown up, and in days too when faith and baptism were so
closely connected that the moment a man believed he confessed his faith publicly by baptism. But
there is not a single passage in the New Testament which describes at length the effect of baptism
on an  infant, nor a single text which says that all  infants are born again, or regenerated, or buried
with  Christ in  baptism. As Canon  Mozley says, “Scripture  nowhere  asserts, either  explicitly or
implicitly, the regeneration of infants in baptism.”  (Mozley’s Baptismal Controversy, p. 34.) Beside
this, we are expressly told  that Simon  the sorcerer, after his baptism, had “no part”  in Christ, and
his “heart was not right in the sight of God.” Simon, therefore, could not have been regenerated, or 
born again in baptism. (Acts viii. 21.)


Gentle reader, do you think there may be a reason why 'there is not a single passage in the New Testament which describes at length [or at short, for that matter] the effect of baptism on an infant'?  Just wondering...