The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1877-01-10
THE BASIS OF IsMIT ATOMS OF INFANT
BAPTISM.
/. BY a. q. HODGE, D. D.

1 quently been excenmunicated, and who
3 therefore still member of the Church,
right to claim the 7iege of having his chill
dren baptized upo .she bare ground of hi
| own membership, without regard to hi
qualifications to di rye the obligations as
sumed by every pa il the ratification o
the baptismal cover q. e., without regarC
to his faith, relig experience, or mora
character
In answer, our ST. eds speak as follows
Shorter Catechism, 7tion 95: "Baptisn
is not to be admins 60 any who are ou
of the visible churc they profess thei
faith in Christ ane zee to Him; bu
the infants of auoh members Of the Wis
ible church are to BE- baptized"
But this is expla aimed and limited by tht
language used in the parallel passage, Con
feseiou' of Faith, chap. xviii, sec. 4: Ono
only those who do outwardly profess tbeil
faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also
the infants of one or both believing parents
are to be baptized"
It must be confessed that the rule is moi
defined in these passages with sufficient pre-
cison to exclude plausible diversities of in
depreciation, and hence the practice in differ.
ent branches of the Presbyterian Church has
not been as harmonious upon this important
matter as is to be desired. The Presbyte.
rans of our honored Mother Church of Scot
land and Ireland interpret this rule as agree
ing with the practice of the Church of Eng
land, and of the Protestants, as well as the
Catholics, of the Continent, of baptizing al
infants, certainly the infants of all parents
who were themselves baptized when infants
In our American Presbyterian Church, on
the other hand, the doctrine and practice has
been from the beginning, that the children
of only such parents are to be baptized Who
in the charitable judgment of the pastor and
session, themselves possess the qualifications
for properly discharging the obligations as
sumed in the baptismal vow, 4. e., faith in
Christ and obedience to Him.
In 1885 the General Synod issued the fol.
lowing charge: "The Synod do also exhort
all the ministers within our bounds to take
due care in the examination of al candidates
for baptism, or that offer to dedicate their
children to God in that sacred ordinance,
that they are persons of regular life, and
have suitable acquaintance with the prin-
ciples of the Christian religion, that that seal
be not set to a S1nnk, sSi thst such benot ad-
mitted to a visible Church relation that are
manifestly unfit for il"
The Synod of New York also, in 1855,
ordered "that previously to the adminiStra-
ton of baptism the minister shall inquire
into the parents knowledge of the great and
fundamental doctrines of the Gospel, and the
regularity of their life; and being satisfied
SO as to admit them, shall in public point out
the special duties of the parents, and partic
ularly that they teach their children the doc.
trines and precepts of Christianity contained
in the Scriptures of the Old and New Tes
taments, and comprised in the Westminster
Confession of Faith and Catechisms.
In 1894 the General Assembly, in answer
to the question: " Whether, besides requir
ing of parents dedicating their children tc
God in baptism, an express engagement o.
the duties of parents, 1t should be considered
as essential that they come ander an erplci
vOw or solemn engagement also to perform
those duties ?" resolved that can answer tt
this is contained in the Directory for Public
Worship, under the head of Administrator
of Baptism, which requires an express agroe
ment on the part Of the parents" j"
| When we turn to the chapter in the Di
rectory we find that the terms of what tn
Assembly of 1894 declares to be an ''expres
engagement" on the part of the parent, ar
that "he pray with and for the child, tina
he set an example of piety and godliness be
fore it, and endeavor, by all means of God
appointment, to bring up this child in tn
nurture and admonition of the Lord"
!, 1t is manifest that it can never be eithe
, rational or moral to encourage a parent
assume such obligations who makes no pre-
fessions of living faith, or whose profession
are not credible. f all this it is abur
dantly evident that, i1 Q view of our Church
all baptized members mot right to haV
their children baptze ut such only as hay
the moral and spiritu qualifications necel
sary for the due disct &c Of the solemn oil
legations involved in {e baptsmal covenan
\ $50 that that seal be Aot set to blank"
And while the Gensra Assembly has NJ
7 seen fit to prescribe GsOl~tely that none br
) communicating meml IS shall have the
children baptized, it ..evertheless has plail
Q ly laid upon the pastor and Session havin
jurisdiction in the case, the responsibility
' demanding credible profession of the qua
ifcations indicated.
INTERPf CITATION.
; 1. The very lh8g{age of our Standard
' when the several passages relating to tt
subject are compared, appears to shut us U
r to this conclusion. In the case of the adu
o who having been himself baptized in infanc
and educated in the Church, neverthele
persistently refuses to assume those bapti
D NAL obligations upon himself (Open, full COT
munion, confession) the violent presumptic
Ill h :, no;tbo.h UbaIiavin0 nerept