Info

Broadus, Am. Com., on <401914>Matthew 19:14 ? ?No Greek Commentator mentions infant baptism in connection with this passage, though they all practiced that rite.? Schleiermacher, Glaubenslehre, 2:383 ? ?All the traces of infant baptism which it has been desired to find in the New Testament must first be put into it.? Pfleiderer, Grundriss, 184-187.

?Infant baptism cannot be proved from the N. T., and according to <460714>1 Corinthians 7:14 it is antecedently improbable yet it was the logical consequence of the command, <402812>Matthew 28:12 sq ., in which the church consciousness of the second century prophetically expressed Christ?s appointment that it, should be the universal church of the nations. Infant baptism represents one side of the Biblical sacrament, the side of the divine grace but it needs to have the other side, appropriation of that grace by personal freedom, added in confirmation.?

Dr. A. S. Crapsey, formerly an Episcopal rector in Rochester, made the following statement in the introduction to a sermon in defense of infant baptism. ?Now in support of this custom of the church, we can bring no express command of the word of God, no certain warrant of holy Scripture, nor can we be at all sure that this usage prevailed during the apostolic age. From a few obscure hints we may conjecture that it did, but it is only conjecture after all. It is true St. Paul baptized the household of Stephanas, of Lydia, and of the jailer at Philippi, and in these households there may have been little children but, we do not know that there were and these inferences form but a poor foundation upon which to base any doctrine. Better say at once and boldly, that infant baptism is not expressly taught in Holy Scripture. Not only is the word of God silent on this subject, but those who have studied the subject tell us that Christian writers of the very first age say nothing about it. It is by no means sure that this custom obtained in the church earlier than in the middle of the second or the beginning of the third century.? Dr. C. M. Mead, in a private letter, dated May 27,1895 ? ?Though a Congregationalist, I cannot find any Scriptural authorization of pedobaptism, and I admit also that immersion seems to have been the prevalent, if not the universal, form of baptism at the first.?

A review of the passages held by Pedobaptists to support their views leads us to the conclusion that were expressed in the North British Review, Aug. 1852:211, that infant baptism is utterly unknown to Scripture. Jacob, Ecclesiastical Polity of N. T., 270-275 ? ?Infant baptism is not mentioned in the N. T. No instance of it is recorded there, no allusion is made to its effects, no directions are given for its administration. It is not an apostolic ordinance.? See also Neander?s view, in Kitto, Bib. Cyclop.,

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment