You are correct in that the above syllogism presupposes some sort of "baptismal regeneration". What that term means though seems to vary depending on who is using it.

If by Baptismal Regeneration you mean that Christ has a promise connected with BAptism and what he promises is true than - yes. Of course, even Luther's Small Catechism points out that the person receiving the baptism must still BELIEVE the promise. That's a distinction from the ex opre operato view.

For what its worth - if you read the Calvin's institutes on Baptism I think you'll find a great deal of commonality between him and this position. In fact, as I've read some modern scholars (i.e. Horton) on Baptismal efficacy I haven't been able to find much of a distinction between his view and the lutheran view. I suspect that most would agree that he is "reformed" so maybe there is not as much of a separation here as some suppose.

Point being - the Calvinian and Lutheran views of baptism lead to a very different perspective on assurance than other paradigms. Even the FV folks miss this distinction with their talk of baptismal regeneration because they turn right around and peek again at the works.

Of course - if one believes that Baptism places one in the Covenant of Grace, and that somehow later that person because of their faith is indeed one of the elect, than they should still be able to look to their Baptism for assurance.

Well - mostly food for thought.
__________________
Chad Hamilton
Peace With Christ (LCMS)
Fort Collins, Colorado

__________________
Chad Hamilton
Peace With Christ (LCMS)
Fort Collins, Colorado