Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!mit-eddie!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Validity of Baptism Message-ID: Date: 20 Nov 90 04:39:27 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Houston -- Department of Mathematics Lines: 61 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jhpb@granjon.garage.att.com writes: >The Catholic Encyclopedia states that Luther, attempting to keep the >traditional practice, suggested a miraculous act of faith on the part of >the infants being baptized. The Catholic Encyclopedia can say what it pleases, but it hardly seems like a good source for understanding Luther or Lutherans. I don't think the Lutheran Confessions speak of an 'act of faith' with regard to Baptism, or conversion. But the Bible clearly teaches that faith is a gift of God (Ephesians 2:8,9). The working of faith in the unbeliever is described in miraculous terms : 'You were dead in your transgressions and sins,..God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in our transgressions.' (Ephesians 2:1-5) I don't see how the working of faith in an infant is any less miraculous than the working of faith in an adult. >But as far as I >can see, Luther's theory of justification requires an act of the will >that a baby can't make without positing a specially miraculous >intervention on God's part. The trouble is, that you are superimposing Catholic synergism on the Bible's doctrine of justification. I can see why you arrive at some kind of contradiction that way. But the Bible does not contradict itself. I thank the moderator for his quotes from Luther and his comments thereon. I don't want to argue about what Luther said, but I certainly believe that Baptism works faith, even in infants. That it has the power to do this is indicated in 1 Peter 3:21, Ephesians 5:25,26, and Titus 3:5, which I quoted in another article. In an article on this subject in the most recent Northwestern Lutheran, Professor Richard Balge of Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary comments, "I would rather have to explain to God why I have baptized infants than why I have not." Our moderator commented: >If you take seriously the concept >that the Word is present in baptism, then you can see that baptism is >more than just a sign. Anybody can see that the Word is present in baptism when the Word is preached at the Baptism, and particularly when the words, "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19) are spoken. Similarly the Word is present in the Lord's Supper when the minister repeats Christ's words of institution, "This is my body,...Drink from it, all of you, this is my blood," (Matt. 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:17-20, 1 Cor 11:23-25) This is not a superstitious incantation, but when Christ's words are used in accordance with his command, with the physical elements he used (water, bread, wine) then by the power of his word, we have a valid sacrament. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are discaimed by The University of Houston.