From New Advent here:
newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm
Baptism of infants
Infant baptism has, however, been the subject of much dispute. The
Waldensesand
Cathariand later theAnabaptists, rejected the
doctrinethat infants are capable of receiving valid baptism, and somesectarians*at the present day hold the same opinion.
The
CatholicChurch, however, maintains absolutely that the
lawof
Christapplies as well to infants as to adults. When the
Redeemerdeclares (John 3) that it isnecessary
to be born again of water and theHoly Ghostin order to enter the
Kingdom of God, His words may be justly understood to mean that He includes all who are capable of having aright
to thiskingdom. Now, He has asserted such a
righteven for those who are not adults, when He says (Matthew 19:14): "Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for thekingdom of heaven
is for such." It has been objected that this latter text does not refer to infants, inasmuch asChrist
says “to come to me”. In the parallel passage inSt. Luke (18:15), however, the text reads: “And they brought unto him also infants, that he might touch them”; and then follow the words cited from
St. Matthew. In the Greek text, the wordsbrephe
andprosepheronrefer to infants in arms.
Moreover,
St. Paul(Colossians 2) says that baptism in the New Law has taken the place of
circumcisionin theOld. It was especially to infants that the
riteofcircumcision
was applied by Divine precept. If it be said that there is no example of the baptism of infants to be found in theBible, we may answer that infants are included in such phrases as: “She was
baptized and her household" (Acts 16:15); "Himself wasbaptized, and all his house immediately” (Acts 16:33); “I baptized the household of Stephanus” (1 Corinthians 1:16).
The
traditionof
Christianantiquity as to the
necessityof infant baptism is clear from the very beginning. We have given many striking quotations on this subject already, in dealing with thenecessity*of baptism. A few, therefore, will suffice here.
Origen*(in cap. vi, Ep. ad Rom.) declares: "TheChurch
received from theApostles
thetradition
of giving baptism also to infants".St. Augustine(Serm. xi, De Verb Apost.) says of infant baptism: "This the
Churchalways had, always held; this she received from the
faithof our ancestors; this she perseveringly guards even to the end."St. Cyprian*(Epistle 58) writes: "From baptism and from
grace. . . must not be kept the infant who, because recently born, has committed no
sin, except, inasmuch as it was born carnally fromAdam, it has contracted the contagion of theancient deathin its first nativity; and it comes to receive the remission of
sinsmore easily on this very account that not its own, but another’s
sinsare forgiven it."St. Cyprian’s
letter to Fidusdeclares that the
Council of Carthagein 253 reprobated the opinion that the baptism of infants should be delayed until the eighth day after birth.The
Council of Milevisin 416
anathematizeswhosoever says that infants lately born are not to be baptized.TheCouncil of Trent
solemnlydefines
thedoctrineof infant baptism (Sess. VII, can. xiii). It also condemns (can. xiv) the opinion of
Erasmusthat those who had been baptized in infancy, should be left free to ratify or reject the baptismal promises after they had become adult.
Theologians
also call attention to the fact that asGodsincerely wishes all
mento be
saved, He does not exclude infants, for whom baptism of either water or blood is the only means possible. Thedoctrines
also of the universality oforiginal sin
and of the all-comprehendingatonement
ofChrist
are stated so plainly and absolutely inScripture
as to leave no solidreasonfor denying that infants are included as well as adults.
To the objection that baptism requires
faith,theologiansreply that adults must have
faith, but infants receivehabitual
faith, which is infused into them in thesacrament
ofregeneration. As to actualfaith, they
believeon the
faithof another; as
St. Augustine(De Verb. Apost., xiv, xviii) beautifully says: “He
believesby another, who has
sinnedby another.”
As to the
obligationimposed by baptism, the infant isobliged
to fulfill them in proportion to its age and capacity, as is the case with alllaws.
Christ, it istrue, prescribed instruction and actual
faithfor adults asnecessary
for baptism (Matthew 28;Mark 16), but in His generallawon the
necessityof the
sacrament(John 3) He makes absolutely no restriction as to the subject of baptism; and consequently while infants are included in thelaw, they can not be required to fulfillconditions*that are utterly impossible at their age.
While not denying the validity of infant baptism,Tertullian*(De Bapt., xviii) desired that the
sacramentbe not conferred upon them until they have attained theuse of reason, on account of the danger of profaning their baptism as youths amid the allurements of
paganvice. In like manner,St. Gregory Nazianzen(Or. xl, De Bapt.) thought that baptism, unless there was danger of death, should be deferred until the child was three years old, for then it could hear and respond at theceremonies. Such opinions, however, were shared by few, and they contain no denial of the validity of infant baptism. It istrue
that theCouncil
ofNeocæsarea*(can. vi) declares that an infant can not be baptized in its mother’s womb, but it was teaching only that neither the baptism of the mother nor her
faithis common to her and the infant in her womb, but are
actspeculiar to the mother alone.
uch:
