The real contrasting argument is the RCC’s practice of passive sacrumentalism Vs a Baptist active participation in their own salvation, whereby the adult baptized person actively chooses to participate in their own salvation and entry into the Christian Church. This active participation visibility cements the individual via choice Vs proxy.
Well it’s not an either or but both for Catholics. Some Protestants in the 1500-1600s made an exclusive rule that only believers baptism is valid, which was never Christian Doctrine.
Were Israelite infants denied inclusion into people of God because they couldn’t make mature profession of belief in God.
No, below the age of reason, children are physically and spiritually subject to their parents, their parents decided for them.
There was never a question of denying infants inclusion in the people God in Jewish belief or Christianity. In fact it is antithetical to Christ’s desire to have little one come to Him.
However this not the end of it.
There is a mature profession later on in Jewish and Catholic traditions.
The bar mitzvah, and Confirmation. Both traditions acknowledge the need for a spiritually mature profession as matter of course, but being below the age of reason should not exclude one from the people of God.
In both traditions we see the same principle of parents answering for their children in spiritual matters, and it is completely legitimate.
This is not an easy thing to wriggle out of since we read the scripture saying.
“And He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and He continued to be subject to them; and His mother treasured all these things in her heart.”
Even God Himself was subject to His parents.
The only controversy in the Early Church was whether the infant should be baptised on the 8th day in line with the jewish custom of circumcision on the 8th day or immediately.
The answer was immediately because Baptism was universally seen as being born again regeneration and immediate Baptism was by necessity therefore.
“For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles the tradition of baptizing infants too.” Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9 (A.D. 244).
“Baptism is given for the remission of sins; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given even to infants. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which required a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.” Origen, Homily on Leviticus, 8:3 (post A.D. 244).
“But in respect of the case of the infants, which you say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, and that the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded, so that you think one who is just born should not be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day…And therefore, dearest brother, this was our opinion in council, that by us no one ought to be hindered from baptism…we think is to be even more observed in respect of infants and newly-born persons…” Cyprian, To Fidus, Epistle 58(64):2, 6 (A.D. 251).
“Be it so, some will say, in the case of those who ask for Baptism; what have you to say about those who are still children, and conscious neither of the loss nor of the grace? Are we to baptize them too? Certainly, if any danger presses. For it is better that they should be unconsciously sanctified than that they should depart unsealed and uninitiated.” Gregory Nazianzen, Oration on Holy Baptism, 40:28 (A.D. 381).
