Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
My own tradition (Presbyterian, and yes it probably colors my discussion of the subject) views baptism as the sign that God claims us as part of the covenant, not that we have faith in God -- sort of a New Testament circumcision. In those churches that practice infant baptism, baptism is baptism, regardless of the age of the recipient. Without question, faith is required of an adult in a way that it is not required of an infant. But either way, it is baptism, the same sacrament. (This is one reason I see many writings steer away from the term "infant baptism" and speak instead of the baptism of infants or the baptism of adults.)
I see the distinction you are making, although I would disagree with the statement that if a child is "christened," and "stays in the eyes of God" he does not need baptism. He doesn't need baptism because he has already been baptized, and those traditions that practice baptism of infants also hold that baptism cannot be repeated.
|
Yep, I'm Presbyterian (PCUSA) also, and was baptized on Christmas Eve when I was two months old. Presbyterians use the term baptism, never christening, and it can happen at any age and it will always be called baptism. This custom varies from denomination to denomination just out of custom and beliefs - none are "better" than the others.
Threaded Mode
