"Even though it should be somewhat on the wane—which I do not at all admit, Mr. Walton—yet supposing it to be the case, what have the Baptists to do with it?"
"I thought such questions might come up and so I came prepared," Mr. Walton replied, drawing a newspaper clipping from his pocket. "Here is something written by Lyman Abbott in the Outlook of November, 1897."
"Is he a Baptist?" asked Dorothy.
"No, indeed," replied Sterling.
"Does he believe in infant baptism?" she asked.
"Yes. What is your quotation from Dr. Abbott, Mr. Walton?"
"Dr. Abbott is writing about the Baptist Congress that had held a recent meeting."
"The Baptist Congress?" exclaimed Dorothy. "What is that?"
"It is a meeting where Baptist men from different parts of the country come together once a year and discuss different religious subjects, and they call it a Baptist Congress, but of course they make no laws. Now, Dr. Abbott was writing about one of these Baptist Congresses, and he says: 'They (the Baptists) all hold, and hold as strongly as ever, that apostolic baptism was a symbolic expression of repentance and faith, and that to baptize infants that can neither repent nor exercise faith is a change of the original ceremony from its original purpose. Historical scholarship abundantly confirms this contention. Infant baptism was unknown in the apostolic church. The change can be justified only on the ground that no rite is of the essence of Christianity, and that the same spirit of Christian liberty which allowed the Christian church to dispense with circumcision allowed it to change baptism from a symbolic act of faith by a penitent to a symbolic act of consecration by a parent.' This is not directly connected with the matter of infant baptism going out of existence which we were talking about just now, but I have read it as showing what this noted advocate of infant baptism has to say. He declares that infant baptism did not exist in the early church, but that the church has changed it."
"I can't understand that at all," said Dorothy, in a perplexed tone. "I thought we went to the Bible to learn about Christianity and to the teachings of Christ and his apostles for our guidance. I thought that being a Christian meant taking Christ as our Master and the Bible as our guide; and now to say that we can change these commands and put something else in the place of them—why, suppose Christ does not want them changed? If we can change one command, why not any of the commands? If it is not important to obey one of the commands, why is it important to obey any of them? Let others do as they please, but I have taken that Book as my guide and I shall stand by it as closely as I can. If I break from it at one point I fear I will start adrift out to sea."