Baptism: For Babies or Believers?

The Church of England's canon law decrees that babies should be christened within a fortnight of birth. Parents are prone to stretch the deadline a bit, but now the whole practice is under fire. Three vicars have resigned from the Church of England, announcing that they no longer believe in infant baptism. Three others, with covert support from dozens of Low Church vicars, have informed their bishops that they will baptize only believing adults.

Infant baptism is a church custom that can be traced back at least to the second century. During the Reformation, radical Protestants on the Continent argued that baptism should be reserved for adult believers who consciously choose Christ--a practice followed by Baptists, Pentecostals, and Seventh-day Adventists, who all use total immersion. For Anglicans, infant baptism is a heritage of Catholicism, preserved because it is "most agreeable with the institution of Christ."

The current rebellion against baptizing children has both practical and scriptural motives. Many vicars are depressed by the number of nonchurchgoing laymen who want to see their child christened merely as a matter of form. Other clergymen have also been convinced by their scriptural studies that in apostolic times baptism was reserved for converted adults, and that Jesus' instruction--"Suffer little children . . . to come unto me"--implies only a naming-and-blessing ceremony.

Yet a number of clerics point out that parents who bring their children forward for christening display a dormant faith. Many a mother, after dressing down a vicar who was reluctant to baprtize little Alfred because he would be brought up in an un-Christian family, has returned to Sunday worship after her child entered the church. Now that the issue has been raised, most Anglican priests hope that some clarifying guidance will come from this month's church convocations.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.