Infant Baptism

The rejection in the 16th century of infant baptism, which had been the norm throughout the history of Christendom, and testified as of Apostolic origin by a battery of the Fathers of the Church [see e.g.

http://www.churchfathers.org/category/sacraments/infant-baptism/

], was not due to Scriptural considerations but to the issue that went back before that: a wholesale rejection of the Catholic Church and the entire theology of the Sacraments. Once the reality was denied of the ordained priesthood with sacramental powers, the very concept of a sacrament as 'an outward sign of a special inward Grace' had to be abandoned in favour of a far more secular concept.

The Jewish rite of circumcision did not take away Original sin, the Catholic rite does. The Catholic priesthood is not a career option, it is a sacramental and ontological change (i.e. relating to ultimate identity) which the priest will carry for eternity – in Heaven or in Hell. A Catholic Baptism is not a contract of agreement, it is a job of work. The Traditional Rite of Baptism contains 5 exorcisms in addition to the Sacramental Act of immersing in (or pouring) the water, which Christ has ordained as the means through which He drives the devil and Original sin out of the soul. There is very abundant evidence that it was practised in the very earliest Christian centuries. Many modern day medical workers have witnessed remarkable transformations after a baptism.

There are many scriptural verses that support infant baptism. There is no verse that specifically excludes them. Nevertheless those who rejected the Church were forced to fall back on 'wresting the Scriptures' (2 Peter 3:16) to support the position they had already adopted.

Consider the following:

Acts 2:38-39

<<Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.>> Acts 2:38-39 KJV

<<And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us. >> Acts 16:15

<< And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. >> 1 Corinthians 1:16

From just these two passages (there are many others) we see that the biblical pattern was for whole households to be baptized when the responsible person became converted. It doesn’t say, “she was baptized, and her household except for the infants”.

Now how does one enter into the Kingdom? Jesus tells us:

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. John 3:5

Now what does Jesus say about infants?

15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein. Luke 18:15-17

Jesus clearly states that infants (the Greek word is paidion, meaning young children or infants per Strong’s, a Protestant source) are able to receive the Kingdom of God, and previously He stated that baptism is the way into the Kingdom.

Now Paul expressly equates baptism with circumcision:

10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Colossians 2:10-12

Circumcision was practised on infants, as we know, as well as on adult converts.