The second sip from Babylon's cup we shall call "Infant Baptism." This was the rite by which I was led into the Roman Catholic Church, and was made a member of that body without my consent or approval. Although it was an imposing ceremony, I do not recall anything connected with it, for I was but a day old when this rite was administered to me. I do not remember the priest's placing a white cloth on my head as he uttered the words: "Receive this white garment, and. see thou carry it without stain before the judgment seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, that thou may have eternal life." Neither do I remember when he placed a lighted candle in my hand, signifying that I was to shine by a virtuous life before the whole world. Nor do I recall the priest's breathing three times in my face, to signify the new and spiritual life I was supposed to receive by the grace of the Holy Ghost; nor his making the sign of the cross upon my forehead and upon my breast, and at the same time sprinkling the "holy water" upon me, denoting the doctrine of my crucified Redeemer, which I was to carry in my heart and to profess openly. I most certainly do not remember when the priest put the, "blessed salt" in my mouth, Which was said to be an emblem of Christian wisdom and of preservation from the corruption of sin. After this ceremony had taken place at the entrance of the church, where the baptismal font is located, While held in the arms off my godmother I was led by the stole of the priest into the church, thus signifying that I was admitted, as a member. Such is the papal ceremony of baptism. It is described thus by a Jesuit:
"The other ceremonies of baptism are also very ancient, and have all a deep meaning.
1. The person to be baptized remains at first without the church, because only baptism gives him entrance into it.
2. The priest breathes three times in his face, to signify the new and spiritual life he receives by the grace of the Holy Ghost (Genesis 2:7, and John 20:22).
3. The sign of the cross made upon his forehead and upon his breast denotes that he is becoming the property of his crucified Redeemer, whose doctrine he is to carry in his heart, and to profess openly.
4. The blessed salt, which is put into his mouth, is an emblem of Christian wisdom, and of preservation from the corruption of sin.
5. By the exorcisms, which are repeated several times, the power of the devil, 'who has the empire of death' (Hebrews 2:14), is broken in the name of the Blessed Trinity.
6. The laying of the priest's hand upon the person to be baptized signifies the protection of God; and the stole laid upon him, and his being led by it into the church, is a sign of the ecclesiastical power, in virtue of which the priest admits him into the church.
7. The touching of the child's ears and nostrils with spittle, in imitation of our Savior (Mark 7:33), signifies that, by the grace of this sacrament, his spiritual senses are opened to the doctrine of Christ.
8. After having renounced the devil and all his works, and all his pomp, he is anointed with holy oil on the breast and between the shoulders, because, as a champion of Christ, he has now manfully to fight against the devil and the world.
9. After the baptism, the crown of the head is anointed with chrism, to intimate that he is now a Christian-i.e., an anointed of God, etc.
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that baptism serves two purposes: (1) the washing away of the original sin, and (2) the admitting of the child as a member into the church. "Original sin, ... is universal. Every child is, therefore, defiled at its birth with the taint of Adam's disobedience. ... Hence baptism, which washes away original sin, is as essential for the infant as for the full grown man, in order to attain the kingdom of heaven.[1]
This doctrine of infant baptism has given rise to the invention of the limbus infantium (the limbo of infants).[2] The papal teaching on this subject is not only cruel, but it misrepresents God's great love toward the helpless. If there is anything in which Satan delights, it is a doctrine that pictures the Lord as unsympathetic and inexorable in His dealings with the human family.
The limbus infantium is something every Roman Catholic mother fears who has an unbaptized infant. Many wonder why the conscientious Roman Catholic mother will rush her newborn babe to the church to be baptized by the priest. The following excerpt will show that the papacy, in the fifth session of the Council of Trent, not only reaffirmed the doctrine of infant baptism, but anathematizes those who deny or treat this rite lightly:
"Whoever shall affirm that children are not to be reckoned among the faithful by the reception of baptism, because they do not actually believe; and therefore that they are to be rebaptized when they come to years of discretion. Or that, since they cannot personally believe, it is better to omit their baptism, than that they should be baptized only in the faith of the church: let him be accursed."[3]
"Whosoever shall affirm, that newborn infants, even though sprung from baptized parents, ought not to be baptized, etc., let him be accursed."[3]
"Whosoever shall deny that the guilt of original sin is remitted by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, bestowed in baptism, etc. If any one thinks differently, let him be accursed."[3]
When one is conversant with the belief that were a child to die before baptism, it would be consigned to the "limbo of infants" where it would never see the light of God, and throughout eternity would be barred from heaven and from the association of the saved, he can readily understand why hasty steps are taken to have a newborn child baptized.
"It is proper here to state briefly what the [Roman Catholic] Church actually teaches regarding the future state of unbaptized infants. Though the church, in obedience to God's word, declares that unbaptized infants are excluded from the kingdom of heaven, it should not hence be concluded that they are consigned to the place of the reprobate. None are condemned to the torments of the damned but such as merit divine vengeance by their personal sins.
"All that the church holds on this point is that unregenerate children are deprived of the beatific vision, or the possession of God, which constitutes the essential happiness of the blessed. "Now, between the supreme bliss of heaven and the torments of the reprobate, there is a very wide margin.
"All admit that the condition of unbaptized infants is better than non-existence. There are some Catholic writers of distinction who even assert that unbaptized infants enjoy a certain degree of natural beatitude---that is, a happiness which is based on the natural knowledge and love of God.
"From what has been said you may well judge how reprehensible is the conduct of Catholic parents who neglect to have their children baptized at the earliest possible moment, thereby risking their own souls, as well as the souls of their innocent offspring."'[4]
One can imagine that after the inculcation of such teaching by a supposedly inerrant church, the bereaved mother of an unbaptized infant greatly suffers mentally when she thinks that she will not only be deprived of the companionship of her child in the hereafter, but also that her little one will never experience the blissful enjoyment of heaven. A Roman Catholic work gives an interesting history of the inception of the doctrine of the limbo of infants, and of the discussion that ensued among the outstanding papal theologians:
"Limbus Infantium - It is an article of faith that those who die without baptism, and in whose case the want of baptism has not been supplied in some other way, cannot enter heaven. This is plainly stated, e.g., by the Council of Florence in the Decree of Union. But there was a natural repugnance to the belief that those who had committed no sin should be tortured in hell, and this difficulty led theologians to adopt various theories as by way of escape.
Some few theologians thought that God might be pleased to supply the want of baptism in infants by other means. Thus St. Bernard (De Baptismo) thought that possibly such infants might be saved by the faith of their parents. A similar opinion is attributed to Gerson, Cardinal Cajetan and others-viz. that the lack of baptism might be supplied by the wish for the sacrament on the part of their parents or others; Cajetan requiring in addition the use of some external sign with the invocation of the Trinity.[5]
"Another theologian, Albertus a Balsano[6], believed that God might commission angels to confer baptism on infants who might otherwise perish without it.
"2. The theologians of the Augustinian order (e.g. Cardinal Noris and Berti) held an opinion at the opposite pole-viz. that the infants in question were punished both by exclusion from heaven and by positive pain, though much less pain than is inflicted on those who die in actual mortal sin. This undoubtedly is the opinion of St. Augustine[7].
The great majority of theologians-the Master of the Sentences, St. Buonaventure, St. Thomas, Scotus, etc. teach that infants dying in original sin suffer no 'pain of sense,' but are simply excluded from heaven. This opinion is no modern invention, for it is found in St. Gregory Nazianzen[8]. But do they grieve because they are shut out of heaven? Bellarmin[9] answers Yes. St. Thomas answers that they do not, because pain of punishment is proportioned to personal guilt, which does not exist here. He says they do not grieve because they cannot see God, any more than a bird is grieved because it cannot be emperor or king: 'nay, they rejoice, because they share in God's goodness and in many natural perfection.' The opinion of St. Thomas is the common one in the church. It is believed that unbaptized infants in Limbo know and love God by the use of their natural powers, and have full natural happiness."[10]
After reading this statement of the views of "the fathers" of the Roman Catholic Church on the destiny of unbaptized infants, and after observing the diversified opinions given oil this subject, one may well ask: Which theory is correct? Such teachings cannot stand the test of the word of God.
Ought an infant to be baptized at birth? One searches the Book of God in vain for one text teaching infant baptism. The apostle Peter gives us some very concrete instructions in regard to baptism, and mentions the steps which a person must take in order to receive this sacred rite. "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 you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:38)
An infant cannot repent of sin nor comprehend the doctrine of original sin, because it is wholly incapable of discerning between good and evil. Furthermore, Jesus is our example and authority in all things, especially in matters of doctrine. When He was baptized, He was old enough to understand what He was doing. "Then comes Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. But John forbade Him, saying, I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comes Thou to me? And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becomes us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he suffered Him." (Matthew 3:13-18)
Christ's command is that instruction be given to the new believer before he receives baptism, thus enabling him to be fully baptized into the name and character of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. "Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:19,20) Christ emphasizes not only the instruction but also the conformity to all that He commanded.
We have on record the experience of the Ethiopian eunuch, (Acts 8:35-38) whom Philip instructed in the word of God prior to his baptism, thus showing the necessity of being conversant with the plan of salvation before receiving the sacred rite.
Another important point for consideration is the mode of baptism. While God's word teaches that there is only "one baptism," (Ephesians 4:5) the Roman Catholic Church offers a choice of three. 'Baptism may be validly administered in either of three ways, viz: by immersion, or by plunging the candidate into the water; by infusion, or by pouring the water; and by aspersion, or sprinkling. ... The church exercises her discretion in adopting the most convenient mode, according to the circumstances of time and place.
"For several centuries after the establishment of Christianity baptism was usually conferred by immersion; but since the twelfth century the practice of baptizing by infusion has prevailed in the [Roman] Catholic Church, as this manner is attended with less inconvenience than baptism by immersion."[11]
"The most ancient form usually employed was unquestionably immersion. This is not only evident from the writings of the Fathers and the early rituals of both the Latin and Oriental Churches, but it can also be gathered from the Epistles of St. Paul, who speaks of baptism as a bath (Ephesians 5:26; Romans 6:4; Titus 3:5). In the Latin Church, immersion seems to have prevailed until the twelfth century. After that time it is found in some places even as late as the sixteenth century. Infusion and aspersion, however, were growing common in the thirteenth century and gradually prevailed in the Western Church. The Oriental Churches have retained immersion."[12]
"[Roman] Catholics admit that immersion brings out more fully the meaning of the sacrament (Romans 6:3,4; Colossians 2:12; Titus 3:5; Ephesians 5:27), and that for twelve centuries it was the common practice. ... The [Greek] Orthodox always baptize by immersion, and erroneously think it so necessary that they doubt the validity of any other kind of baptism. They have gone so far as to rebaptize all Latins who joined their church."[13,14] "There is no express mention of the baptizing of infants in the New Testament."[15]
In studying the mode which Jesus followed in baptism, do we find any record that He had a linen cloth placed on His head, or had a lighted candle put in His hand by John? No, the word of God says nothing in behalf of all these liturgical objects. The baptismal font and the priest were lacking. Neither was there any stole used by John to lead Christ into the church. We do not find recorded the names of any godmother or godfather to Christ. On the contrary, instead of following all this ritual and ceremony, He wended His way to the river Jordan, and when John administered the rite of baptism, they both went down into the water and Christ was immersed." (Matthew 3:13-17; Mark 1:9,10) In the early Christian church there was no baptismal font wherein was a small quantity of water to be used in administering the rite of baptism. The real mode of baptism calls for much water. "And John also was baptizing in Anon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized." (John 3:23)
Paul, the apostle, also gives further light on baptism and presents it as a memorial of the burial and resurrection of the Son of God. "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know you not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection." (Romans 6:1)
As the new believer goes down into the watery grave, he is buried with his Lord in baptism; and as he comes forth, he testifies that he believes in the death, the burial, and the resurrection of the Son of God. The performance of this rite is an acknowledgment on the part of the baptized one that he has died to the world and to sin, and that his past life is buried in the death of his Savior. Just as Christ came forth from the grave victorious, so the recipient of this ordinance comes forth from the waters of baptism a victor over the enemy; and henceforth he is to walk in perfect accord with the law of God. It is the Roman Catholic Church that has extended to men the cup from which baptism by sprinkling and pouring have issued. The Inspired Record states that "the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication." This prophecy has been fulfilled literally by those Protestant churches which have continued to sip the papal beverage of infant baptism and the practice of sprinkling and pouring.
If the Holy Bible is the only guide for Protestants to follow, then why do they accept the teaching of tradition on certain points of faith? The Protestant pledge gives no place for adherence to man-made doctrines. Listen to these words by the Protestant historian, John Dowling:
"The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants!' Nor is it of any account in the estimation of the genuine Protestant, how early a doctrine originated, if it is not found in the Bible. ... Hence if a doctrine be propounded for his acceptance, he asks, is it to be found in the Inspired Word? was it taught by the Lord Jesus Christ, and His apostles? If they knew nothing of it, no matter to him, whether it be discovered in the musty folio of some ancient visionary of the third or fourth century, or whether it springs from the fertile brain of some modern visionary of the nineteenth, if it is not found in the Sacred Scriptures, it presents no valid claim to be received as an article of his religious creed. ... And he who receives a single doctrine upon the mere authority of tradition, let him be called by what name he will, by so doing, steps down from the Protestant rock, passes over the line which separates Protestantism from popery, and can give no valid reason why he should not receive all the earlier doctrines and ceremonies of Romanism, upon the same authority."[16]
When we stand before God in the judgment, how wonderful to be able to take our stand on His Written Word and look into the face of Him and say, " Lord, I have carried out Thy commands, I have followed closely what I have read concerning the manner in which Christ was baptized, and have received that sacred rite according as His example indicated." The words of Christ's approbation would mean more to one than all the vain glory that attends the ritualistic service of the apostate church.
The Lord does not hold man accountable on any point of doctrine until enlightenment comes; but He does expect His commands to be definitely carried out when man becomes conversant with them. " To him that knows to do good, and does it not, to him it is sin." (James 4:17) When light shines from God's word into a person's heart, He demands obedience from him. "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent." (Acts 17:30) There is only one course left for those who have been sprinkled, and that is to follow Christ's example and be immersed. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Galatians 3:27)
Notes: