Infant Baptism
Bono:
My defense of Infant Baptism can be easily summed up in six points:
1st God entered into a covenant with Abraham. This covenant was the Covenant of Grace. In it, God established a visible, discernable, body of people that would be his peculiar possession (Genesis 17).
2nd This body of people, the nation of Israel, was in fact the Church in Old Testament times.
3rd In those times, the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace was circumcision. This ceremonial rite was administered as a rite of initiation into the membership of the Church (Genesis 17:10, 11). This outward circumcision of the flesh was symbolic of spiritual circumcision of the heart, or regeneration.
4th The Church was explicitly commanded to administer this rite of initiation to their infants.
5th In New Testament times, God having removed the shedding of blood from our worship, has replaced circumcision as the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace with baptism. This outward washing speaks of inward cleansing and renewing of the Spirit, in short, regeneration. Both credo- and paedo-baptists agree that this is now the ceremonial rite of initiation into Church membership.
6th Throughout Old Testament times, the Church was required to administer the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace to their infants, and thus receive them into Church membership. And so, unless it can be shown from scripture that our Lord or his Apostles purged the Church of infants, or barred Church membership to Gentile babies that had long been granted to Jewish babies, we must assume that the obligation to receive them through the rite of initiation still exists. For, just as we cannot add to the command of the Lord, neither can we diminish from it.
Thus, we should Baptize children of believing parents. I think these six points make that conclusion inescapable. If anyone wants to challenge any of them, I'm up.
Ebowed:
The real question is whether it is ethical to assume that the infant would like to have the same religion as his parents.
Raising the child in a religion is different than putting him through ceremonies which, depending on his views, might have eternal consequences.
afleitch:
My parents defence of infant baptism was that I was close to death when I was born. That was back of course before 'limbo' was formally abolished by the Church (of course the Church was still infallible despite changing it's mind ;) ) It was also habitual, as most infant baptisms are. My concern is with confirmation. I was confirmed at 11, which is far too young to formally make the choice whether or not you wish to remain Catholic.
J. J.:
I regard sacraments as a gift. We can get gifts without asking.
Bono:
Quote from: J. J. on February 05, 2008, 12:20:56 PM
I regard sacraments as a gift. We can get gifts without asking.
According to this loogic, we might as well start whipping out paedocommunion...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page