Whilst Scripture calls the Christian convert to be baptized to wash away past sins 244
and be given a clean slate, baptism does not re-orientate what Paul refers to as the “law of the members” operating within the human body245. This body by nature and inclination remains “dead because of sin” even in the baptized246; that will not be fully resolved until the resurrection. Yet when the soul is spiritually renewed through the grace of the gospel, the mortal body may be presented as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God247 so that the life of Jesus might be manifested even whilst in mortal flesh. Adult baptism is “the response of a good conscience towards God”248; a conscience and spirit that inclines to moral truth and through elective grace understands such to have been perfected in the teaching of Christ. It opens the way to that supreme gift of grace by which the spirit of man is united to Christ’s and empowered to over-ride the instincts of his bodily members so that in Paul’s words he may “possess his own vessel in sanctity and honour”249.
Through baptism the Christian convert is cleansed and pardoned from past sins, but the ongoing cleansing is provided through Christ’s blood (chapter three). In the context of infant baptism, the issues of conscience, personal co-operation and pardon for personal sin do not apply; rather it replaces circumcision as the sign and instrument by which newly born infants are united to the Body of Christ and incorporated into the care of the Church. It should be evident from a reading of the gospels that unbaptized or uncircumcised infants were never abhorrent in Jesus’ eyes, and He alone determines where they are to spend eternity250. Such innocent souls have not broken a law and where there is no law sin is not 242 Jn1:9
243 Mt25:40
244 Acts22:16
245 Rom7:23
246 Rom8:10
247 Rom12:1
248 1Pet3:21
249 1Thes4:4
250 Jn5:22
41
imputed251; where there is no personal knowledge of evil God does not assign guilt252; sons may be afflicted for the sake of their father’s sins (as we are for Adam’s) but are only held accountable for their own253. Apart from which, Adam’s act of disobedience has been universally expiated by Christ’s Act of righteousness254 within the Universal Covenant under which all infants fall, being at that stage incapable of defaulting.
As for the comparison with circumcision, under the Old Law Abraham was justified in God’s sight before he was circumcised255. However, babies do inherit the physical and moral consequences of Adam’s sin in the form of corruptible and corrupting bodies, which apart from gospel grace are anything but benign. So entirely irrespective of whether infants are baptized they will demonstrate the concupiscent impulses of the “flesh” as their parents soon discover. For many years, the Roman Catholic Church went along with Augustine regarding our Lord’s perceived contempt for the souls of little children who die unbaptized.
The Church now entrusts such souls to the mercy of God, whilst this document delineates why such God-maligning speculation in this area has long been the devil’s ruse256. The Eastern Orthodox Church largely rejected Augustine’s theological approach, not a few within her regarding him as a major factor in the East/West schism, indeed “the fount of every distortion and alteration of Christian truth in the West”257; one who in the process of prosecuting the heresies of his day subverted the teaching and tenor of the ante-Nicene Fathers.
Manichaeism – misplaced dualism
One such heresy had been propagated by Manes (third century) who had developed a sophisticated form of Gnosticism, the central tenet being a metaphysical dualism resulting in the cosmos and consequently human nature being divided through the influence of two opposing deities: one good the other evil, neither being sovereign. Before his conversion to the catholic faith, Augustine had been a follower of Manes and like him believed mankind’s sinful inclinations could be explained and partly excused by an alien nature within him. Like many heretical perversions of the faith, an element of truth may sometimes be present, and the danger is a polemical over-reaction, resulting in this case in Augustine’s unwillingness to discern the anthropological substance dualism in the writings of Paul. For Manes had been right to affirm that there are two opposing moralising agents within man and that Paul had asserted as such in his epistle to the Romans, but was in error concerning its origins, nature and the ethical implications. For the apostle had taught that the components making up human nature derive from the one God - the immaterial components (soul and spirit) are directly planted by Him whilst the material component is transmitted in a degenerative state ultimately from fallen Adam’s loins. This is a form of dualism nevertheless being the consequence of original sin.