Baptism and Infant Baptism

The Bible attests that baptism is the way a person becomes part of the “Body of Christ”, the Church. At the end of his speech at Pentecost, Peter told his hearers what they had to do to be saved: “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Note that Peter said “everyone”, not just adults. In Catholic belief, the Latin term “ex opere operato”, which literally means “from the work performed”, expresses the essentially objective mode of operation of grace imparted in the seven sacraments, by God’s Spirit, (of which baptism is the first) and its independence of the subjective attitude of either the minister or the recipient. Thus, even though infants are too young to understand and accept baptism, they can nevertheless be baptized.

Through baptism, converts to Jesus Christ first received forgiveness of their sins, the gift of the Holy Spirit, and became members of the community of Christians, the Church. Does baptism have anything to do with salvation? Jesus said: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mk 16:16). He told Nicodemus that “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (Jn 3:5). The Church of New Testament times responded to this teaching by immediately baptizing all new converts (See Acts 2:38, 41; 18, 8; 19:5; 22:16). Paul explained that baptism unites believers to Jesus in his death so that they will also share in his resurrection (Rom 6:35). Baptism then is also a “means” to salvation.

From the earliest Christian centuries, the Church has baptized either by immersing or by “pouring” the water over the head of the person while praying the Trinitarian formula (Mt 28:19). Nowhere does the Bible say how much water is to be used (see Acts 9:36:37), otherwise we would be seeking salvation “by works”, and not by the grace imparted in the sacrament of Baptism. “The Church does not know of any means other than baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are „reborn of water and the Spirit'. God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments” (Catechism of the Church §1257)

The evidence that water Baptism starts the process of salvation is overwhelming in the Bible. However, a common evangelical bias, or prejudice, can be stated like this “Nothing we do with our bodies in the physical realm has anything whatever to do with God’s dealings with our eternal souls in the spiritual realm”. This bias has its roots in an ancient Gnostic heresy called Manichaeism, which the Catholic Church dealt with centuries ago. This evangelical notion that we should worship like angels, without the aid of our bodies, leads evangelicals to reject not only the Eucharist and Baptism, which they style “ordinances”. These are Sacraments of the New and eternal Covenant.

Evangelicals and fundamentalists are under the erroneous impression that Catholics do not believe in “having a personal relationship with the Lord”. The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states: “The mystery of the faith requires that the faithful live in a vital and personal relationship with the living and true God” (§2558). Most Catholics pray to this effect when receiving their First Communion, at Confirmation or on a daily basis or whenever they receive the Body and Blood of Christ in Communion during the Catholic worship service, the Mass. The expression, however, is not found in the Bible. It is a product of our present cultural way of thinking. A more Biblical expression is: “following Christ”.

Circumcision and Baptism are both rites by which people come into a special Covenant (not “ordinance”) relationship with God (see Exodus 12:48). “Repent and be baptized, everyone of you ….. This promise is for you and your children and for all those …..” Peter tells us in Acts 2:38-39. Jesus also said that no-one can enter heaven unless born again of water and the Holy Spirit (Baptism) (Jn 3:5). In Mt 19:14, Jesus urged: “Let the children be, do not keep them back from me, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these”. The fundamentalists’ argument that this does not apply to infants since the children referred to are able to approach Christ on their own, is incorrect, since the parallel texts (Lk 18:15) and the original Greek texts use the word for “infants in arms” (little children who are unable to approach Christ on their own).

More importantly, Paul likens baptism to circumcision, and it was mainly infants who were circumcised under the Old Law (see Col 2:11-12). Circumcision of adults in Judaism was rare, there being few converts. If Paul, in making this parallel, meant to exclude infants from Baptism, it is strange that he did not say so. In everyday life people use water for cleanliness and hygiene as a precaution against dirt and disease. Water in one form or another is also an absolute necessity if a person is to stay alive Among the Jews of Palestine ritual cleansing with water was a common practice. It was this ritual cleansing to which Jesus gave a deeper spiritual meaning. He did this by connecting the Holy Spirit’s working in the believer’s life in a particular way with water. It is by the Holy Spirit’s working in the water of baptism that the spiritual corruption of sin is washed away and a new life with God is begun (Jn 3:5, Titus 3:5, Jn 7:37-38). Naturally enough, the people we read about being baptized in Scripture, are adults because they were converted as adults. This makes sense because Christianity was just starting out and there were no “cradle Christians”, no people brought up from childhood in Christian homes.

Does the Bible say that infants and young people can be baptized? There are some good indications. Lydia was converted with all her household (Acts 16:15). The expression “with all one's household” in Jewish usage meant the inclusion, not only of children but of servants. The jailer of Paul and Silas was converted by them. We are told that “without delay, he and all his household were baptized” (Acts 16:33). And in his greetings to the Corinthians, Paul recalled that, “Yes, and I did baptize the household of Stephanas” (1 Cor 1:16). In the case of the jailer, “He and all his” must refer to himself and at least two others. If it were just the jailer and his wife it would read “he and his wife”, but it says “He and all his”, which must include children, as well. The scripture evidence here leans in favor of infant baptism. There is nothing in the Bible that says infants and young children were unsuited to Baptism. Infant baptism in the early Church.

Fundamentalists do not pay much attention to historical evidence, yet early Christian practice clearly shows that infants were baptized. Origen, for instance, in the 3rd century, wrote: “The Church received from the apostles the practice of giving baptism also to infants, though they do not have sins of their own: so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ and that they be his members”. This and other quotes from esteemed Fathers of the Church of the early centuries, such as Origen and John Chrysostom, in their writings “Commentarii in Romanos 5:9” and “Catechesis ad illuminandos”, cannot go unheeded. The Ecumenical Council of Carthage in the year 252 AD debated the fact, not that infants should not be baptized, but that it should not be withheld from them until the eighth day of birth, as with circumcision, with the Jews. There was no record in the early Church of anyone condemning infant baptism, showing that it was common practice.

Other outstanding leaders in the early Church testifying to the Church’s practice of infant baptism are Polycarp of Smyrna (167/8 AD), Justin Martyr (died 165 AD), Cyprian of Carthage (C. 249 AD), and Hippolytus of Rome (170-236 AD), Irenaeus of Lyons (120-202 AD). St Augustine of Hippo in the 4th century taught strongly of the necessity of Baptism for wiping away “original sin” – the sin of our first parents, which we all inherit. The 16th Synod of Carthage (418 AD) definitely condemned those who denied baptism to new-born babies.

The most common question about infant Baptism is: “How can a parent or guardian’s faith substitute for the faith of a child?” It is noteworthy that Jesus did not pose this question. When Jairus asked Jesus to raise his young daughter from the dead (Mk 5:22-43) or another father asked Jesus to expel a demon from his son (Mk 9:17-27), Jesus acted with power because of their faith, not the faith of their children.

How much more would Jesus desire to free children from an even worse bondage, the bondage of sin, and raise them to eternal life, in response to the faith of their parents and of the whole Christian community. But the Catholic Church also teaches that the parents of the baptized child must provide a faith environment that will prepare the child to make a personal commitment to Jesus Christ on reaching maturity.

Nothing is sadder than the sight of those little plots of ground in some cemeteries, particularly in America, where children have been buried in separate, often unconsecrated sections, simply because their parents adhered to denominations who do not believe in infant Baptism.

Confirmation is the sacrament of the Church for the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the life of a baptized Christian. The Holy Spirit first comes into a person at baptism (Acts 2:38) but the Acts of the Apostles also speaks of the prayer for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:15-17). “When Paul laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them and they spoke with tongues and prophesied”. (Acts 19:6). Later on, an anointing with oil was also added to the Sacrament. Through the Sacrament, the Holy Spirit empowers God’s people to proclaim the Good News with power, to live the message and to continue Jesus’ mission and ministry in the world. Expectant faith is necessary to experience and receive the full power of the Spirit. Many today have come to know this power in a fuller way through the “baptism (or release) of the Spirit.”

The Evangelization Station
23260 Joaquin Gully Rd. Unit 6
Twain Harte, California, 95383USA
Telephone: 209-728-5598
E-mail: evangelization@earthlink.net
www.evangelizationstation.com
Pamphlet 032

"The speaking in tongues was a sign to Peter that they should be baptised immediately."

I would also add that the Lord required of him (Cornelius) Baptism:

Acts 10: What is it, Lord?....call hither one Simon, who is surnamed Peter: 6 He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side. He will tell thee what thou must do.

47 Then Peter answered: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You are quoting church positions, I’m quoting from scriptures.

I believe that I and I alone am responsible for my sins. Your church injects a third party (clergy) into this relationship, where a third party assumes a role not defined in the Bible. If the clergy may forgive sins, without a person’s acknowledgment or remorse, then wouldn’t the right thing to do be to forgive every sinner’s sins after they die? Wouldn’t that make the point of living a Christ-like life pointless?

I humbly submit that we are all born blameless, and we each earn the sins that will damn us. My sins are my fault, not the compounded sins of my father. Through prayer, self-discipline and repentance I may plea for forgiveness.

At the end of the day, as long as the child goes to Heaven, does it really matter what mechanisms are involved?

Could You please explain these verses to me:1 Peteer 3:20 who had once been disobedient while God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark, in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. 21 This prefigured baptism, which saves you now. It is not a removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God 7 for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.

Literal meaning no eisesgesis, no interpretation just what does it sttraight out says.

And I am still wating on the verse from you that Jesus specifically says that you can not under an circumstance baptize children.

With out that you have no arguement.

Cornelius was a practicing Jewish convert and his whole household, too. We know what Jesus said is the work God requires, but Cornelius did not know this yet, for how can they know unless the Gospel of God’s Grace in Christ be preached to them. So, when Conelius was instructed to send for one Simon Peter, the instruction was to hear the Gospel preached. Peter went the extra step to have immediate baptism because this is an outward sign of trusting in God’s Grace in the Crucified and rien Savior. Red the passage in Acts carefully. Do not read into the passage that which is not there. Then apply what you know Jesus said is the work God requires to be saved. How could Cornelius believe on Jesus, as a practicing Jewsih convert, if he had not received the good news of the Gospel of Grace? Cornelius was praticing obedience to the Law, and Simon Peter brought the Good News of the Grace of God in Christ. Upon hearing this Truth, Cornelius was immediately saved, thus Peter knew his instructions from Jesus, for his responsibility, was to get these saved people baptised immediately. But the baptism held no magic to save, since these were already saved when they heard and believed, as Jesus said is the work God requires.

The Holy Spirit only enters the ‘washed in the blood of the lamb’ spirit, to effect the human soul, which then manifests with the body doing something ‘new’.

And of course you can docuemtnt that this has been an accepted teaching for roughly 2000 years..

Because with out proof this just an opinion.

"You are quoting church positions"

Indeed I am brother, through which I am on solid footing:

1 Tim 3:15 "that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."

"Your church injects a third party (clergy) into this relationship, where a third party assumes a role not defined in the Bible."

No, Christ did that, and it's in the Bible and clearly defined:

Jn 20: 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

Mt 28: 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you

"At the end of the day, as long as the child goes to Heaven, does it really matter what mechanisms are involved?"

Yes, because they are mechanisms established by Christ.

Actually, Jesus probably had His first Jewish baptism at a very early age, according to the Jewish baptismal traditions. But you likely already knew that. We have a couple of posters trying to play gotcha, and I didn’t want that to happen to you.

Jesus didn’t say “Don’t” do an endless list of things. He didn’t say “Don’t spit in church” - yet we don’t do that, do we?

Let’s approach this a little differently.

If repentance of a sin requires an understanding of the sin, remorse for committing the sin, and a promise to try to abstain from committing the sin again - and we both agree that a baby is incapable of doing any of the above, then isn’t granting a Baptism on this person, making a mockery of the Baptismal sacrament?

If Baptizing a child who is sinless, who neither understands nor is capable of committing a sin, understanding remorse or confession, isn’t making a mockery of the sacrament of Baptism - then passing the Sacriment to the homosexual activists who were dressed up as Priests and Nuns shouldn’t have been a mockery either, right?

In one case, you are extending a sacriment to one who does not understand it - in the other one, you are extending it to someone who wishes to mock it. By doing so, are you not belittling the sacriment?

I did know that, the ceremonial bathing was/is? very important in the Jewish faith.

I keep wondering exactly what sins has the newborn comitted that they need Baptism for?

And what of those babies murdered in the womb? Are they hell-bound because they never got sprinkled with a little water?

Inquiring minds.....

Jn 20: 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

Are you telling me that this was not baptism of/in/from the Holy Spirit? I have nothing further to post to you since I will not play gotcha on your twisted terms.

God has given parents the authority, right, and responsibility to speak in their child’s name. This principle is illustrated in John 9, when the Pharisees questioned the parents of the man born blind.

The money quote is verse 23: “Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.”

This shows the common understanding that prior to the man’s coming of age, the parents would answer in his name. But since their child was a grown man, he was responsible for himself, and his own answers.

Of course it does.

1 Peter 3:
20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Notice the “by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”. It’s the resurrection of Jesus that saves us, not the baptism. The figure (outward symbol) is Baptism. It is not what saves us, nor is it any part of what saves us. The word of God will save and destroy just as the water both saved Noah and destroyed all others on earth. Again, the water in Noah’s time was symbolic of the word of God.

Every human being since Adam has inherited the spiritual nature from Adam ... a spirit void of LIFE which is the Life of God in the power and person of the Holy Spirit. The sin nature reamins with you so long as you live in the veil which brought you forth, your body. All spirits are outside of the time which rules the body—except the body Jesus has since His resurrection. If one has a dead spirit, a spirit without life in it, and the life of sin is activated at some point when conscious choice is made, then what is ‘impelling’ the human spirit is a spirit of disobedience, and this is condemned as unrighteous so it cannot come into God’s Holy Presence. BUT, if you make the choice to believe His life is what you need in your human spirit, you have chosen LIFE in the human spirt as oppsed to death ruling the human spirit [’for since Adam fell death has reigned in the human spirit’].

A child who has not made a conscious choice has not activated the human spirit, so neother death nor life reigns in that spirit. Of such, God teaches throughout the Bible that the innocent are precious in His sight, so I would without hesitation say the alive unborn will be benefactors of His Redemption from Adam’s race should they die before making a conscious choice in disobedience.

My position is in the Bible. Please see GonzoII’s post #61.

Why would Peter Baptize these people if it wasn’t necessary? He never put on the Believers anything that wasn’t necessary. Case in point: the question of circumscision for gentile converts to Christianity.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.