UPDATED: WHY I SUPPORT THE BAPTISM OF THESE INFANTS
1. The decision to baptize the children originated at the theistic level (with God, not any human). No human being can receive Orthodox Christian baptism without it being a manifestation of divine grace operating in their life. Salvation comes from God. "Salvation is of the Lord." (Jonah 2:9). Ultimately, salvation does not come from human will. (Rom. 9:16). Opposing these baptisms is opposing God. All life, whether physical or spiritual are gifts from God.
We can look at this deductively. In a deductive argument, if the premises are valid, than the conclusion follows logically and inescapably. The two premises below are true, so the conclusion follows.
1. Salvation comes from God.
2. Infants who are baptized are saved.
Conclusion: The baptisms were from God.
2. Making disciples of all nations is a biblical mandate. (Matthew 28:19). Excluding infants from salvation because of imperfection in their environment and who they are associated with (factors completely beyond their control) is unfair to them. God does not show favoritism (Romans 2:11), and He is no respecter of persons. (Acts 10:34).
3. The salvation of souls for whom Christ died is a greater good and far more important than political Church disputes. Christians should always think of the greater good in every situation. The infants are now in possession of salvation and receiving the Holy Eucharist, and recipients of divine grace. Had they died before baptism, they would have been lost. Depriving infants of salvation because of the imperfections in their environment is selfish and against the Gospel. Not baptizing an infant when it is in a bishops capacity to do so would equate to spiritual abortion.
4. We have an "in spite of" God. He saves us in spite of our sins. He saved the children in spite of the sins of their foster parents. The implication of denying these infants baptism is that they must first be in a perfect environment. This attitude is totally unfair to them and totally against the Gospel. God saves us in our imperfections and in spite of our sins and associations.
5. Jesus specifically instructed his disciples to let the children come to him. (Matthew 19:14). Jesus said, ..."Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God." (Luke 18:16). There is absolutely no valid reason to ever deprive children of baptism and salvation.
6. It is a fallacy to conflate the issues (gay couple and children) and to punish the children for the sin of their foster parents. Guilt by association is a fallacy of reasoning. If the critic took his position to it's logical conclusion, it would mean that the children could never get baptized until they are 18 or on their own. This isn't fair to the children. Scripture teaches that it is wrong to punish children for the sins of the father. "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father"...(Ezekiel 18:20). Says Isaiah, "Defend the cause of the fatherless." (Is. 1:17).
7. St. Paul's main priority was the salvation of souls. He writes, "To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." (1Cor. 9:22). He also writes, "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." (1Timothy 2:3-4). St. Peter: "The Lord...is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9).
Conclusion: Only a person who lacks missionary zeal and does not live in what I call the love current (does not love neighbor) would be so selfish to oppose these baptisms. I would argue that it is actually the modernists, or people influenced by modernism who oppose proselytism.
Pro-LGBTQP "Orthodox" Exposed
https://truthbetold7.substack.com/p/pro-lgbtqp-orthodox-exposed?s=w
