The incompatibility of these two propositions forces Baptist theologians to attempt to draw a successive line of denial of the baptism of children throughout the centuries-old history of the Church. And since this task is practically impossible, Baptists have to resort to significant omissions and generalizations, then to juggle facts. Here is one such masterpiece: "(in the history of the Church) only a few minorities have occasionally spoken out against such practices. One such group was the Donatists (3rd century A.D.) in North Africa, most of whom remained faithful to the principle of baptism of adult believers. Between the eighth and thirteenth centuries, a group known as the Patarini emerged in northern Italy, denouncing the practice of infant baptism as erroneous. The influence of the Patarini was especially great in Milan. Beranjar of Tours, who died in 1088, was critical of the then prevalent magical concepts of the mysteries. For this he was condemned as a heretic in Liège... Some Petrobrusians in the twelfth century also rejected infant baptism, saying that only adult believers should be baptized. The Waldenses set forth their belief in the baptism of believers in the twelfth article of their confession... In the fourteenth century, John Wycliffe and his followers, the Lollards, rejected infant baptism. In the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, the Bohemian brothers, followers of Jan Hus, were persecuted for denying the necessity of infant baptism. Thus, it can be concluded that there was a certain continuity among small groups who probably adhered to the New Testament concept of regeneration and baptism of believers. This continuity existed until the beginning of the Protestant Reformation." [55]

First, in all of the above movements, the rejection of infant baptism was not the main idea or reason for their separation from Catholicism.

Во-вторых, у многих из них были серьёзные ереси даже с точки зрения баптистов, что исключает возможность проведения преемственности единого духа. Например, донатисты совершенно иначе смотрели на осуществление таинств и на святость Церкви, нежели баптисты. Они отрицали даже крещение взрослых (как и всякое другое таинство), если совершавший его священнослужитель не был кристально чист и непорочен. По этой же причине отделившись от Церкви, требовали от своих последователей строжайшего аскетизма. Кроме того, донатисты “возрождали раннехристианский культ мучеников... а позже, когда движение приняло яркую социальную окраску – его сторонники грабили и убивали богатых, духовенство, освобождали рабов” и т.д.[56]

В-третьих, в этой “преемственности” нет даже хронологической непрерывной последовательности. Вышеприведённые скачки в столетия (например, с III по VIII, или с VIII по XIII вв.) и крайне поверхностное обозрение и ориентиры также подрывают историчность этой апологии. Например, как понимать: “между VIII и XIII веками... возникла группа, известная как патарины”? К тому же эта группа настолько малоизвестна, что во многих словарях и исторических справочниках они не упоминаются.

В-четвёртых, о какой преемственности может идти речь при такой очевидной хронологически и доктринальной разрозненности этих “небольших групп�

В-пятых, все они отрицали католическое понимание крещения детей, которое отрицаем и мы.

История Церкви - это непрерывная борьба с ересями и расколами. И с этим трудно не согласиться. А значит, красивую фразу: "Вековые заблуждения принимались сменявшимися поколениями безоговорочно"[57] правильнее было бы классифицировать как заблуждение.

The unanimous assertion of all Protestant denominations that the original practice of the Christian Church consisted in the baptism of adults only does not find a single weighty confirmation.

If infant baptism were a new thing, it could be established only after great disputes, as a result of struggles, and perhaps even divisions. However, history does not tell us anything about the disputes of Christians around the baptism of infants. Consequently, there is no novelty in the practice of infant baptism.

Much more can be written about the incorrectness of the Protestant view of infant baptism, but it never gets to the root. And it is again in soteriology, jurisprudence (which distorted soteriology). Obviously, it is necessary to change the very principle of theology, its direction. And then in the Body of Christ there will be a place for children, and at the Chalice they will not be superfluous, and the Bible will find the necessary quotes. Otherwise, the children of Protestants will remain in the "Kingdom of Heaven", despite the fact that they are not even allowed into the Church.

[1] Protopresbyter Nikolai Afanasiev. Entry into the Church. Ed. "Pilgrim". Moscow, 1993, p. 101.

[2] "Basic Principles of Faith of Evangelical Christians-Baptists". Odessa. Ed. "Chernomorye", 1992, pp. 8-9.