Out of curiosity:
Wheelock says that the student has learned to conjugate a verb in all of its finite forms after learning the subjunctive. What does he mean by finite forms? Since there are finite forms of verbs, are there also infinite forms?
Finite forms are the verbs which are “limited” by person, number, mood, tense, and voice; or more simply, the conjugated forms. The forms which are not finite are, quite logically, the infinitives.
hmm… but Latin infinitives have tense though… and voice… hehe, but I guess two out of five isn’t bad. 
Also, isn’t the infinitive a mood of it’s own? I’m such a trouble maker. 
Well, that’s true…
I think it just had to be limited by person and number to be considered “limited”. The infinitive is not considered a mood (as far as I know), those are: indicative, subjunctive, imperative.
A quote from the introduction to 501 Latin Verbs:
The Infinitive Mood, on the other hand, removes all coloration from the meaning of the verb and merely expresses the idea of the verb without any reference to number and person.
The forms which are not finite are, quite logically, the infinitives.
Of course! I should have realized that. That question was ignorant, but at least I know now.
You win. Luckily I put that little disclaimer in (AFAIK)
Yay!! 
LOL
Regarding the infinitive mood:
Most texts I have encountered consider the infinitive a separate mood. Wheelock, however, states that there are three moods, and leaves the infinitive out. Wheelock also, however, claims that passive imperatives only exist in deponent verbs, a statement I am unwilling to accept.
What fun would passive imperatives be if they only existed in deponents? Not much. Also, Allen & Greenough’s New Latin Grammar uses amo, amare as it’s example for the passive imperatives.
Anyway, I’ve gone off on a tangent.
Valete,
Titus Marius Crispus
passive imperatives exist in non-deponent verbs;
the infinitive is certainly a separate mood and strong arguments have been put forward that there is also a participial mood.
~D