"This completes the list of household baptisms. I think they are sufficient."

"But, Doctor, not one of these households are said to have had children in them, and if they did have children the children must have been old enough to believe, because it is stated in the case of every one of them that those that were baptized believed or received the word that was spoken. They were all old enough to hear, to understand and to believe the Word."

"From all the pa.s.sages which I have heard in these discussions," said the father, "one thing seems to stand out very plainly about baptism, and that is that in the Bible times faith had to come before baptism."

"If this is so," said Dorothy, "then infant baptism is unscriptural, because it is a baptism without faith. Infants can not exercise faith."

"Daughter," said the Doctor, "you are mistaken. I can show you that in the case of every infant baptism there is always a faith that precedes the baptism."

"What do you mean, Doctor?" asked Dorothy in great perplexity.

At this moment the telephone bell rang and Dorothy was called to speak to a girl friend, who extended to her an invitation for a carriage ride on the next afternoon. In a few moments the conversation was resumed.

CHAPTER VIII.

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 G.o.d-parent must have faith."

"The G.o.d-parent!" exclaimed Dorothy in a puzzled tone. "What is a G.o.d-parent?"

"If the child has not a parent, then some Christian man or woman believes for the child and is thus called its G.o.d-father or G.o.d-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 ent.i.tles it to baptism, then all children are ent.i.tled to baptism; but if it is the faith of some parent or some G.o.d-parent that ent.i.tles the child to baptism, then it is only a certain cla.s.s 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 ent.i.tled 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 G.o.d, 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 G.o.d; 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 G.o.d, 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.