While I wonder if I will ever find the exact article I read more than a year ago, I do think I have found enough Eastern Orthodox thought which, while not perhaps universally accepted within the Orthodox communion, should show how differently millions of other Christians can look at Baptism and Sin.
Using Google Books, I located this work:
Theological Sentences: Unveiling the Undeniable Impact of Sacrificial Obedience
By Samuel J. Mikolaski
You’ll notice that in his various references to Infant Baptism, the term for Sin is rarely entwined with his
". . . . ethnic and national identity received religious imprimature.
To be a Christian meant to be part of the group, through infant baptism,
where group meant ethnic identity and nation…
"In the Eastern Orthodox traditions baptismal theology and practice are quite different from Episcopal tradition practice in the West…
At baptism the infant or convert is sealed with the Oil of Chrism, a sign of receiving the Spirit and is made fully a member of the church. This at least honors biblical kerugmatic practice in conjoining Baptism, union with Christ armed with the Spirit, and membership - though one might disagree with its application to infants.
"…baptism upon personal profession of faith is the most clearly attested pattern in the New Testament… They emphasize that the church is the community of faith, and that on either mode nurture in faith is the responsibility of the church.
Infant baptism is jusitfied on grounds of:
- corporate faith and
- the faith which the child shares with its parents, a form of understanding which may be deemed to be parall with believers baptist and the explicit faith of the convert, but both are said to be responses to grace."
Sin just isn’t one of the things that come up when discussing the nuances of infant baptism.