This might ruffle some feathers.
Like most (if not
all) Western Evangelicals I was baptized when I was a bit older (for
me at 16). While I made a profession of faith at 4 or 5 years old,
general practice was not until someone was a bit older to make the
public declaration. As a baby I had been dedicated with my twin
brother at just a couple years old. My parents publicly stating that
they would raise my brother and I in the ways of the Lord. At some
points I would hear of “babies being baptized”, but it was always
with suspicion, mostly talking about Roman Catholics. Baptism is
really just a sign, a public confession when you want to let other
people know that you are following Jesus, and is only for those who
can make that conscience decision to follow Him.
And up until about 6
months ago I have held to that position as well.
I want to take you
though a truncated journey of my conversion from a credo-baptist
(a.k.a believers baptism) to a paedo-baptist (infant baptism). This
is a journey that I never thought I would go on, but as I have delved
into Scripture, taking into account as well the history and practice
of the Church it became increasingly evident there was more to the
story than I was told. As someone in the Wesleyan tradition I am
going to use the Wesleyan Quadrilateral to help frame my journey and
discovery. Before I get into the weed I want to express a few
qualifiers.
I am in the Free
Methodist Church, a denomination that allows for both infant baptism,
and infant dedication. As someone who will be ordained in the near
future, I am agreeable to perform both infant baptism and dedication.
This is not something I am not dogmatic on, and am willing to do
both.
Secondly, I have no
ill-will to my credo-baptist brothers and sisters. I do not believe
that mode of baptism is a tier-one issue. While I believe (as I will
explain) infant baptism is a more grounded practice, it does not
invalidate other forms of baptism. Actually, for someone who has
never been a follower of Christ needs to be baptized (as is shown in
Scripture). But for those who have kids in the Church I feel infant
baptism is the best course of action.
Next, part of the
discussion hinges on our definition and discussion of sacraments.
While my Roman Catholic brothers & sisters believe there are 7, I
as a Protestant practice the two of baptism and the Eucharist (the
Lord’s Supper). There are some in more Anabaptist circles who
refrain from terminology such as sacrament, and prefer to use
“ordinance” Over the last several years I have become more aware
of the huge importance that sacraments plats in the life of the
Church. They are more than just ways we remember things. Sacraments,
as John Wesley spoke of them are a means of grace, by which God
through the enables and strengthens the Christian in holiness. We so
often focus on what WE do when we practice the sacraments, rather
than focusing on what GOD does in and through them. While yes baptism
is a public declaration of our allegiance to Christ, Scripture also
is very clear as to God’s work through the at of baptism
(Colossians 2:6-13). I am working on a blog post about sacraments,
and the Eucharist specifically, so wait for that.
Finally, this post
is not wholly exhaustive. Between references to Scripture and
tradition there is more than I could cover here and would love to
individually connect with anyone who has questions.
Scripture: Likely
one of the strongest cases from Scripture for infant baptism is how
baptism is the new circumcision. In the Old Testament the sign of
being apart of God’s people was the sign of circumcision. Every
male was to be circumcised, so people would know they were apart of
the family of Abraham. This of course after the initial act by
Abraham was performed on all male infants. Physical circumcision
then continued to be the sign for God’s people up until the coming
of Christ.
In the book of Acts
we have numerous stories of baptisms taking place. It of course
tracks that adults who became followers of Christ would be baptized,
as the initiatory sacrament into the Church. And during a number of
these instances there is reference to that person and their entire
household being baptized. Religion being a familial thing, it would
make sense that all in a family would be baptized into the community
of Christ as a sign of new life in Him.
Here is a helpful
list of comparisons of baptism and circumcision from Phillip Kayser
that is very comprehensive, and I appreciate not having to compile
the entirety of the Scriptural references.
|
Meaning |
Circumcision |
Baptism |
|
Both are a |
Gen. 17:11, |
Rom. 4:11-12 |
|
Both are a |
Rom. 4:11 |
Rom. 4:11-12; |
|
Initiate |
Gen. 17:14; |
Eph. 2:12; 1 |
|
Both |
Deut 10:16; |
John 3:5; |
|
Point to |
Rom. 4:11; |
Acts 8:37; |
|
Cleansing |
Jer. 4:4; |
1 Pet. 3:21; |
|
For those |
Ezra 9:2; Is. |
1 Cor. 7:14 |
|
Both |
Josh. 5:2-9 |
Romans 6:3-4 |
|
Both |
Deut. 30:6; |
Gal. 3:27; |
|
Both |
Rom. 2:28-29; |
1 Pet. 3:21 |
|
Both |
Gen. |
Acts |
|
Both |
Gen. 17:9-14; |
Rom. 4:11; |
|
Both |
Deut. 30:6; |
Mark 1:4; |
|
Both |
Gen. 17:9; |
Rom. 6:3-4; 1 |
|
Neither |
Jer. 9:25; |
Acts 8:13-24; |
|
People |
Ex. 3:1; Rom. |
Luke 23:43; |
|
Both |
Gen. |
Acts 2:39; |
|
It is |
Josh. 5:1-12 |
1 Cor. |
|
Both |
Gen. 17:19-25 |
Acts 8:13-24; |
|
Both |
|
Eph. 4:5; |
|
It is |
Gen. 17:14; |
Luke 7:30 |
Tradition: Simply
put, up until the Protestant Reformation in the 1500’s, infant
baptism was the universal practice of the Church. When we look to the
early Church Fathers it is nearly unanimous that infant baptism was
the practice since the early Church (as early as 100AD). Justin
Martyr, Origen, Lactantius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gergory Nazianzen,
Augustine, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Cyprian and many many more
Church fathers attest to infant baptism being the mode of the Church
for the children of believing parents. Of course this did not exclude
new converts to the faith, who would be baptized into Christ (be they
Jew or Gentile).
It was only until
the radical reformers who questioned this practiced. But aside from
these, all the main reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Arminius,
Cranmer) upheld the legitimacy of the practice of the standard.
Reason: Some
may ask, “wasn’t Jesus dedicated, and so because of that children
should be as well.” This is true, Jesus was dedicated as an infant.
But heres the thing, the New Covenant had not been initiated yet.
There was no death of Christ to be baptized into. It cannot be denied
that Jesus would have been circumcised coming from a Jewish family.
In the Jewish mindset, baptism was an act of purification, bit did
not represent the distinction that circumcision does until after the
death and resurrection of Christ.
Now that we are in
the New Covenant, is it not also reasonable that we want to signify
that our children are in fact apart of God’s people? We don’t
believe that our kids are little pagans running around until they
make a decision to follow Jesus. Yes, infants who are baptized should
when they are ready to, either affirm their baptism, or be confirmed
as a sign of living their life in line with their baptism.
Another aspect we
should also consider is the very individualistic culture that we are
in living in the 21st Century West. Throughout Scripture,
we see a familial/communal aspect to ones faith. So much of our focus
in how we talk about our faith in Christ is what we do, rather than
the focus on what Christ does for us.
Experience: Be
it the baptism of an infant or an adult, we know that being baptized
does not ensure that person will remain in Christ. This is often a
common objection to infant baptism, “that baby can’t make a
decision, there’s no guarantee they will follow Him.” This is
true, just as there is not guarantee that anyone will apostatize the
faith.
Back to a
consideration of the individualization of culture and faith. One
thing that we forget about Sacraments is that is is more than just
recognizing our part, but they are also a declaration of what God has
done, and His work in our lives to save us. What’s more powerful
than a declaration of the Gospel, and the work of Christ when someone
is baptized? In baptism we recognize God’s saving work, and through
that work we state that our children are now apart of God’s people,
to be raised in His ways. While similar to dedication as some would
say, I would argue the impact is much more profound.
Final Thoughts:
As I said, this post is not exhaustive. But it is a sort of primer as
to why I no longer consider myself a credo-baptist. But what I’ve
presented here represents some of the core reasoning that I now am a
proponent of infant-baptism. This transformation has been just one
aspect of my theological journey to one that has been more connected
to the historical Church that is faithful to Scripture. I still
identify myself as an Evangelical (in the religious, not political
meaning), but have also been increasingly identifying some of the
pitfalls and shortcomings that Evangelicalism has accrued through
being suspicious of the past.
For other in-depth
discussion on infant-baptism you can check out these resources:
https://reformedperspectives.org/files/reformedperspectives/theology/TH.Johnson.Baptism.html
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/a-brief-defense-of-infant-baptism/