What is the Anglican view of Baptism?

Yes some of the commentaries mention that and then go onto to say that they give more credence to the baptism interpretation. The following quote is from the 'Expositor's Bible Commentary - Revised' and I agree with the author in this case:

 

No, I'm not a universalist. I am a Christian. But I try to never despair of God's Grace. A God who is likened to a shepherd who would abandon all for 1 lost sheep, or would turn his house upside down for one lost coin, or would spare nothing, not even the life or his only begotten son, seems willing to do anything so that none should perish but that all would come to repentence. I hope that God would see it right to save all people, and I pray that all will be reconciled to God in Christ. But I don't see it clearly in Scripture that all will be ultimately saved, nor do I see where the Bible gives a number of those who are damned either, so I keep silent and let God, the perfect judge, fill His mansion with whomever and however many as He pleases. I read on a Lutheran Blog an answer to the above question of whether unborn babies or babies who died prior to baptism are saved or not, and I thought it was immensely comforting while at the same time being faithful to Scripture...Here it is:

And to that I say AMEN!

 

Two things: One, if people would get rid of the unscriptural and superstitious idea that the application of an outward ritual does anything to change one's nature or status before God, they would not have to be worried so much. Two, if people would realize that God does not hold accountable those who are unable to be accountable for their own moral actions, suchas infants, very young children, or the mentally deficient, they wouldn't have to be worried about the destiny of these.

This idea that water baptism saves, and without it people are condemned to hell, is one of the most noxious ideas ever conceived by man.

 

Where does Anglican/ Catholic teaching on Baptism condemn people to hell? If I remember aright, we are told that we should be baptised by water and by word, Triune Immersion, but there are other means of baptism.

 

That's very interesting Highchurchman. Could you explain that the other methods are? Many thanks.

 

I agree with the first half of yoru quote there Celtic but where do you get the idea that infants or young children are not held accountable?

 

Dear Layman,

Two exceptions have been admitted ,or recognised,
1. Baptism of Desire. i.e. Perfect Contrition.
2. Baptism of Blood. Martyrdom!

 

Some individuals such as S.Augustine of North African fame, or Thomas Aquinas, implied children suffer in the lightest way, S. Gregory Nazianus thought children would receive neither the Bliss of Heaven nor the condemnation of the lost. S.Gregory of Nyssa's opinion was infants who died unbaptised will attain to all the Bliss of heaven.All are guesses, the Church has no dogma on the subject, or if it has, I will be surprised.

 

From scripture, the same place I get all my "ideas".

 

I try to too But I dont now any passage where the infant is deemed not responsible for his actions. I mean if you see a baby, it cries, it shows anger, jealousy, snatching toys off other children, in other words the baby manifests sin. Does the Bible teach an age of accountability? I can't find anywhere where it so says

 

The Bible does say that an individual is responsible only for his/her own sins. And the things you mentioned -- would you really call those sins? Even if they are considered such, are infants considered morally responsible for them if they are unaware that they are sins and incapable of moral judgments and actions? I say no, based on overall scriptural teaching.

I guess one's position is at least partially determined on how one defines sin and the effects of it. I hold more to an Eastern view of sin and original sin, so I might come to a different conclusion than many in the Western tradition. Certainly it is clear that certain effects of Adam's disobedience fall upon all the human race and the creation, including infants -- all are subject to death, etc. But I believe that spiritual death does not happen to anyone until and unless they knowingly engage in sin; thus, those incapable of moral decisions -- infants, young children, an the mentally impaired -- are not held accountable.

I wouldn't go as far as John Wesley and define sin as the willful violation of a known law; I think that definition misses the fact of the sin, weakness, or deficiency in our very nature as a result of Adam's transgression. However, I think there are different degrees of accountability based on the nature of the sin -- willful or not willful, done with moral ability or done without moral ability.

I appreciate the opportunity to engage in discussion without resort to pejorative comments. Thanks for your post.

 

I can remember our local priest talking about baptism and how infants need to be baptised to be saved. It always occurred to me that was a tad nasty to do to babies.

 

Every one is already born in spiritual death, incapable and unwilling to turn to God.

Your supposition might lead to the inconvenient idea that growing up or being mentally sane is a curse.