The bishops of the province, dreading the inevitable tumults of a popular election, begged the Emperor Valentinian to appoint a successor by imperial edict; he, however, decided that the election must take place in the usual way. It devolved upon Ambrose, therefore, to maintain order in the city at this perilous juncture. Proceeding to the basilica in which the disunited clergy and people were assembled, he began a conciliatory discourse in the interest of peace and moderation, but was interrupted by a voice (according to Paulinus, the voice of an infant) crying, "Ambrose, Bishop". The cry was instantly repeated by the entire assembly, and Ambrose, to his surprise and dismay, was unanimously pronounced elected. Quite apart from any supernatural intervention, he was the only logical candidate, known to the Catholics as a firm believer in the Nicene Creed, unobnoxious to the Arians, as one who had kept aloof from all theological controversies. The only difficulty was that of forcing the bewildered consular to accept an office for which his previous training nowise fitted him. Strange to say, like so many other believers of that age, from a misguided reverence for the sanctity of baptism, he was still only a catechumen, and by a wise provision of the canons ineligible to the episcopate. That he was sincere in his repugnance to accepting the responsibilities of the sacred office, those only have doubted who have judged a great man by the standard of their own pettiness. Were Ambrose the worldly-minded, ambitious, and scheming individual they choose to paint him, he would have surely sought advancement in the career that lay wide open before him as a man of acknowledged ability and noble blood. It is difficult to believe that he resorted to the questionable expedients mentioned by his biographer as practised by him with a view to undermining his reputation with the populace. At any rate his efforts were unsuccessful. Valentinian, who was proud that his favourable opinion of Ambrose had been so fully ratified by the voice of clergy and people, confirmed the election and pronounced severe penalties against all who should abet him in his attempt to conceal himself. The Saint finally acquiesced, received baptism at the hands of a Catholic bishop, and eight day later, 7 December 374, the day on which East and West annually honour his memory, after the necessary preliminary degrees was consecrated bishop.
Strange to say, like so many other believers of that age, from a misguided reverence for the sanctity of baptism, he was still only a catechumen, and by a wise provision of the canons ineligible to the episcopate.Before we start on why that was done and why baptism is NOT just symbolism and why we baptise infants, I'll quote this from Tim Staples book Surprised by Truth
I toook Jimmy Swaggart's challenge: 'We would like to challenge the Catholic Church to demonstrate that the saints and martyrs of the first three hundred years accepted the beliefs and practices of the Catholic Church as it exists today' I acquired a copy of J.B. Lightfoot's The Apostolic Fathers and devoured it. I went to the library on campus and began to study the ives and works of other Fathers of The CHurch, reading their writings in the original Greek and checking their theological arguments against what the Greek text of Scripture said. I researched all of the early councils of The CHurch. To my dismay, all I found was Catholic truth. I could not believe Brother Jimmy couldd have read what I read and issued his 'challenge'. The writings of the Church Fathers clearly show that the early Church ws Catholic long before the time of the Emperor Constantine"The 'symbolic view' of Baptism originates as a doctrin of the Anabaptists movement which broke away from MArtin Luther's reform efforts
And we who have approached God through Him (Christ) have received not carnal, but spiritual circumsion, which Enoch and those like him observed. And we have recieved it through baptism, since we were sinners, by God's mercy; and all men may equally obtain it
I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated outselves ot God when we had been made new hrough Christ.. As many are peruaded and beleive that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are isntructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated int eh same manner in which we were outselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father... and of our Savior Jesus Christ and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water/ For Christ also said. "Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven' An for this rite we have learned from the apostles in order that we may not remain the children of necessiry and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge and may obtain int he water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who choose to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father
And this food is called among us the Eucharists, of which no one is allowed to partake but the ma who believes tha the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed int he washing that is for the remission of sins and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined
For thus He wishes us to be converted and to be as children acknowledging him who is truly out father, regenerated by water and this is a different beginning than creation. BEing baptised, we are illuminated; illuminated, we become sons; being made sons, we are made perfect; beign made perfect, we are made immortal.
Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life
The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed teh secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the SpiritOr Cyprian of Carthage (martyred 258)
In respect to the case of infants, which you say ought not to be baptised within the second or third day after birth, and that hte law of ncient circumcision be regarded, so that you think that one who is just born should not be baptised and sanctified within the eighth day,we all thought very differently in our council. For in this course which you thought was to be taken, no one agreed; but we all rather judge that the mercy and grace of God is not to be refused to any one born of man.. we ought to shrink from hindering an infant, who being lately born, has not sinned, except in that, being born after the flesh accrding to Adam, he has ontracted teh contagion of the ancient death as its earliest birth, who approaches the more easily on this very account to the reception of the forgiveness of sins -- that to him are remitted, not his own sincs, but the sins of another (Adam)
Who is so impious as to wish to exclude infants from the kindgom of heaven by forbidding them to be baptised and born again in Christ? This the Church always had, always held; this she received from the faith of our ancestors; this she perserveringly guards even to the end
Whoever says that even infants are vivified in Christ when they depart this life without the participation of His Sacrament (Baptism), both opposes the Apostolic preaching and condemns the whole Church which hastens to baptize infants, because it unhesitatingly believes that otherwise they can not possibly be vivified in Christ,"
I believe that Baptism is a means of grace, that it saves, but it isn't a 'work' of man but that it is God's gift and that the commandment to preach the Gospel and baptize means children too. As a Baptist wmfights would probably disagree with me and as a Baptist he should.
I neither stated or 'implied' that Baptist children are pagan until they get baptized. Neither did I for Ambrose. However in Ambrose's case as he was old enough to be a Bishop the question of why he wasn't baptized from a Christian family is relevant. Not that he was a bad guy as he rests in heaven but in light of Catholics speaking hereon it is reasonable. Just as I would question a Baptist about his kid who upon reaching 34 years of age hadn't been baptized.