WRONGING THE LITTLE ONES.
"Doctor Vincent," said Dorothy on her return to the room, "you were
saying that the baptism of an infant is always preceded by faith. How
can that be? Can an infant exercise faith?"
"Not the infant, but the father or mother."
"Oh, you mean it is the parent that has faith! And do you baptize an
infant because the parent has faith?"
"Yes. Either the parent or the god-parent must have faith."
"The god-parent!" exclaimed Dorothy in a puzzled tone. "What is a
god-parent?"
"If the child has not a parent, then some Christian man or woman
believes for the child and is thus called its god-father or god-mother."
"And so the infant, in order to have baptism, must have some person to
believe for it?"
"Yes, my daughter, you catch the idea exactly."
"I thought you said just now that infants ought to be baptized because
of their heavenly nature, and now you say they cannot be baptized unless
they can get some Christian man or woman to believe for them."
The Doctor for a moment was startled as he saw where his arguments had
brought him. He saw in a flash that both of the statements could not be
true.
"Doctor, which fact must I accept?" she asked. "Must we baptize infants
because of what they are in themselves with their heavenly natures, or
must we baptize only those infants who can come and have somebody
believe for them?"
"I see your point, and it has a show of logic in it."
"Oh, Doctor," she said, almost impatiently, "why do you say a show of
logic? Can both of these positions be true? If the child's nature
entitles it to baptism, then all children are entitled to baptism; but
if it is the faith of some parent or some god-parent that entitles the
child to baptism, then it is only a certain class of infants that can be
baptized and the baptism is put on the basis of the faith of another."
"That sounds a little strange to me," said the father. "I did not know
that one person could be religious for another. I thought that every tub
had to stand on its own bottom in religion. This thing of one person
believing for another person so that the other person, especially a
little infant, is entitled to baptism--well, that sounds very new and
strange. How can the parent make the child fit for baptism? Do you mean
to tell me that if I had a little infant and I should believe in
Christianity that that would be a reason why not only I should be
baptized, but my little infant also?"
"Is it thought, Doctor," asked Dorothy, "that the baptism does the
infant any good?"
"Oh, no," said the Doctor, "the baptism has no power in itself."
"I think the baptism does the infant a wrong," said Dorothy. "Baptism
is a religious ceremony which everyone ought to obey of his own will and
accord. In the Bible it comes after believing and is a sign of what has
taken place in the person's heart. Now, when you baptize an infant you
force on him a religious ceremony. Suppose he grows up and is converted
and desires to obey Christ in baptism and then learns that baptism was
forced on him in infancy. Instead of believing and then being baptized
he is first baptized and then many years afterwards he believes."
"And suppose, Doctor," said the father, "he never believes; then what
have you got? You have a person walking around baptized who ought never
to have been baptized, though he is not to be blamed for it. If the
baptism does no good, why do you baptize him? Why not follow the regular
course and get him first to believe and then to be baptized?"
"I have an idea," said the brother, "that infant baptism started with
parents with dying infants who they thought would be lost if they were
not baptized."
"Oh, never," said the Doctor.
"Well, I remember in a house where I was boarding while at college that
a mother thought her little infant was about to die and she sent off
immediately for the preacher to baptize her child, for she said she was
afraid it would be lost if it died without baptism. Now, if that mother
had that idea about baptism, why may not many others have the same idea
about baptism?"
"Since I come to think of it," admitted the Doctor, "I myself have had
quite a number of excited mothers to ask me to baptize their sick
infants because they were afraid for them to die without baptism; but
they are the exceptions and of course their fears were entirely
groundless. This is a Catholic doctrine. The Catholics teach, that
baptism saves the infant, but we teach no such doctrine."
"But is it not natural for the mother to get such an idea about
baptism?" asked Dorothy. "They come to think that it keeps the child
from being lost and the child, as it grows up, would get the idea from
the mother that it was saved because of its baptism in infancy. If the
mother thought the baptism saved her child, why would she not be apt to
tell this to the child, and how awful it would be for a child when grown
to think that it was saved when actually it was lost. Doctor Vincent,
this doctrine seems to me to be a frightful one. It looks as if it might
do a world of harm, and I cannot see where it does a particle of good;
and besides, it is so different from that principle which father said
just now was one of the characteristics of religion, and that is that
religion must be a personal matter. Each soul must be accountable to
God, and it is what I do and not what somebody else does for me for
which I shall be held responsible."
"My daughter," said the Doctor, "I have let the discussion run along for
awhile in this fashion without mentioning the main feature and benefit
of infant baptism. It is a dedicatory ceremony. The parent brings the
child and offers or dedicates it in baptism to God; and not only that,
never forget that the baptism does not stop with that."
"With what?" asked Dorothy.
"With the sprinkling of the water."
"You say the baptism does not stop with the sprinkling of the water?
What else, then, Doctor, is added?"
"Why, the parent not only dedicates the child to God, but solemnly
promises to watch over the child and to seek to train it up in the
nurture and admonition of the Lord."
"Ought not every parent to do that?" asked Dorothy.
"Exactly; that is what I am contending for, that every parent--I mean
every believing parent; we could hardly expect an unbelieving parent to
do so--every believing parent ought to dedicate in baptism his infant
and to make the promise for its religious training."
"Is it necessary to baptize the infant in order for the parent to make
the promise?" asked Dorothy.
"Miss Dorothy," said the Doctor, with a faint smile, "you amuse me; you
almost astonish me. What grudge have you against the simple baptismal
ceremony? Do you think there is anything wrong when the parent brings
its little one to dedicate it to the Lord to have a few drops of water
sprinkled upon the little one?"
"Certainly not. Sprinkle as many drops upon the infant as you please;
sometimes the more the better. But why call it baptism? I think the
wrong consists In calling it Bible baptism."
"Oh, you object to the sprinkling. Do you think we ought to plunge the
infant in water?"
"Not at all, Doctor. It is true I do not believe sprinkling is baptism,
and in that respect I do not think you have even baptized the little one
when you sprinkle it; but admitting that sprinkling is scriptural
baptism, I think it is wrong to call the ceremony baptism. It is all
right for a parent to dedicate its child and to use water with it in any
shape, but do not let the parent call it baptism. Baptism is something
that the person receives of his own accord, and that comes after
believing and as a sign that the person has had a change, that the
person has died to his old life, as we read the other night, and has
risen to a new life; but don't call the sprinkling of water on an infant
baptism and thus deprive that child ever afterwards of having a regular
Bible baptism, performed on himself by his own choice. I find myself all
confused, Doctor, as I try to understand your reasons for infant
baptism. You must let me tell you frankly how it appeals to me. At first
you said the child deserved baptism because of its own heavenly nature,
and next you said it deserved baptism not because of its own condition,
but because of the faith of its parent, and now you mention this other
idea of dedication and pledging on the part of the parent. This last
characteristic seems to have more reference to the parent than to the
child, and seems to make the baptism something that is used for binding
the parent to do his duty to the child. In that case you make the
baptism a matter of the parent doing his duty, and if there is any
religion in the ordinance it seems to be on the part of the parent
instead of the child. If you call that Bible baptism, I think you put
baptism in the wrong place."
Sterling presented a picture. He had hung his hopes high on the Doctor's
arguments. In fact, he came to the house with a feeling of triumph and
wondered why he had not thought of bringing the Doctor into the
discussion earlier. But as he had tried to follow the Doctor in his
different arguments, he had found himself lost in a wilderness. He kept
up his courage, however, believing that ultimately victory would come.
"Doctor," said Dorothy after she had remained thoughtful for awhile, "is
there not great danger in infant baptism that people will get the idea
that salvation comes through a ceremony rather than from Christ? You
spoke of the mothers thinking baptism would save their infants. If those
mothers think so, then do you not see that the practice of infant
baptism in a community helps to spread abroad in that community the idea
that salvation comes by some outward magical performance?"
At this point Dorothy was called to the door by a party of young people,
who were returning from a walk, and who, seeing a light in the Page
home, had run in for a few minutes.
"Father," said Dorothy, "you must listen to the Doctor for me and give
me the points when I return."