-
The Baptism Debate: Understanding and Evaluating Reformed Infant Baptism
The majority of those who identify as Christians believe in infant baptism (also known as paedobaptism). Infant baptism is a major doctrinal belief for Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, and Reformed churches, such as Presbyterians. Yet, there is a strong contingent of Christians who reject infant baptism, arguing that only those who believe in Christ should be baptized (a position known as credobaptism). Given the fact that baptism is a core command within the church, this is an essential issue on which to have an opinion! This debate about baptism can sometimes get messy and confusing. Christians on both sides of the issue often do not understand their own position, let alone the opposing arguments. I wrote The Baptism Debate to help believers understand what baptism is and why infant baptism does not actually fulfill the biblical definition of baptism. Because Catholics and Lutherans have their own reasons for baptizing infants, I…
-
Immersion in the Early Church Baptismal Practice
Those who argue for infant baptism often appeal to church history as evidence that infant baptism was a regular church practice. Although infant baptism was indeed practiced by the time we get to the end of the 3rd century, prior to that time there are significant questions regarding the regularity of the practice. Furthermore, although modern paedobaptists will often appeal to church history for defense of paedobaptism, they often ignore the early church testimony on the regularity of immersion. In other words, the early church sources are clear that immersion was the regular mode of baptism for those in the church, and deviations from that practice were viewed as exceptional. Immersion in the Didache One of the earliest sources we have on baptism is from the Didache (7:1–4). Although a lot could be said about the Didache, here I want to emphasize that this early church source emphasizes immersion. Consider…
-
Are the Household Baptisms an Argument for Infant Baptism?
Does the mention of household baptisms in Acts provide biblical evidence of infant baptism? Many theologians have argued just that. When arguing for infant baptism, paedobaptists of all kinds (Catholics, Lutherans, and Reformed) will often appeal to the household baptisms in Acts and 1 Corinthians as examples of when infants might have been baptized (cf. Acts 10:1-2; 16:13-15; 16:32-34; 18:8; 1 Cor 1:14-16). In the words of one Catholic paedobaptist: Catholics (and other advocates of infant baptism) do not claim that these verses prove that the Bible teaches infant baptism. However, a straightforward reading of them suggests that children were likely baptized along with the household or family of which they were a part. Thus, these verses pose a difficulty for Protestants who oppose infant baptism and must be explained differently. The Household Argument for Infant Baptism Explained The argument is that when the Bible talks about a household—especially when…
-
Zwingli’s Separation of Faith from Baptism
Prior to the Reformation, faith was always associated with baptism. This obviously raised issues for infant baptism, since it is difficult to see how infants can exercise faith. To deal with this difficulty, Augustine taught the concept of fides aliena, an alien faith that belonged to others was applied on behalf of the infant. Usually, this was the parent’s faith, but sometimes the church’s. However, many theologians viewed this as an unsatisfactory answer. So, the Catholic church developed the idea of fides infusa baptisme, faith or power which was “infused” to the infant through baptism. It was into the world of fides aliena and fides infusa that Martin Luther was born. Although Luther broke away from the Roman Catholic church in many key areas (one such area being justification by faith alone),[1] he largely embraced Rome’s view of infant baptism. One major difference was that Luther saw no problem with…
-
Paedobaptism and Problem of the New Covenant
Reformed paedobaptists view the new covenant as an extension of the old covenant, not its replacement. Specifically, reformed paedobaptists view the new covenant as an extension of the Abrahamic covenant. In Reformed paedobaptist theology, the newness of the new covenant is usually thought to refer to external aspects only. For example, Jeffrey Niell notes, “The newness of the new covenant pertains to the external aspects, the outward administration, of the covenant of grace. The new covenant is not new in its nature of membership.”[1] In other words, “The transition from the old covenant to the new covenant is a smooth unfolding of God’s redemptive plan, because the two covenants are organically connected—they are essentially one covenant of grace.”[2] I have argued in a previous post that the new covenant replaces the Mosaic covenant, not the Abrahamic. In this post, I will discuss the qualitative difference of the new covenant in…
-
Paedobaptists and the Problem of New Covenant Regeneration
Reformed paedobaptists view the new covenant as an extension of the old covenant, not as its replacement,[1] although as I argued before, the new covenant is discussed in terms of replacing the Mosaic covenant. However, in Reformed paedobaptist thought the newness of the new covenant is usually thought to refer to external aspects only. For example, Jeffrey Niell notes, “The newness of the new covenant pertains to the external aspects, the outward administration, of the covenant of grace. The new covenant is not new in its nature of membership.”[2] In other words, “The transition from the old covenant to the new covenant is a smooth unfolding of God’s redemptive plan, because the two covenants are organically connected—they are essentially one covenant of grace.”[3] However, an examination of the texts concerning the new covenant leads one to observe there are significant qualitative differences between the old and new covenants.[4] Although there…
-
Infant Baptism and the Connection to the Abrahamic Covenant
As we have noted before, for the Reformed paedobaptist, the covenant of grace is the foundational argument for paedobaptism. Within the covenantal system, the specific covenants mentioned in Scripture are just various manifestations of that singular covenant. Specifically, however, for the Reformed paedobaptists, the New Testament discussion of the “old covenant” is the Abrahamic covenantal manifestation of the covenant of grace. In contrast, the Bible’s mention of a new covenant is not not “new” in the sense of something that has not been seen before, but rather, a renewed version of that Abrahamic covenant which already existed. Note, for example, renown Berkhof’s explanation. “The covenant made with Abraham was primarily a spiritual covenant, though it also had a national aspect, and of this spiritual covenant circumcision was a sign and seal…. This covenant is still in force and is essentially identical with the “new covenant” of the present dispensation. The…
-
Covenant Theology and Infant Baptism
Reformed paedobaptists are not shy to assert that their defense of infant baptism relies on covenant theology. In fact, although many Baptists take issue with infant baptism not being mentioned anywhere in Scripture, this is really a simplistic understanding of the Reformed position. In reality, for the Reformed paedobaptist, the entirety of the debate centers around the unified covenant of grace. Note the words of paedobaptist Cornelis Venema: This debate can be reduced to one principal question: Does the covenant of grace in its New Testament administration embrace the children of believing parents just as it did in the Old Testament administration? However complex and diverse the arguments, pro and con, on the subject of infant baptism may be, this remains the overriding issue. Precisely because the debate between paedobaptists and Baptists centers on the doctrine of the covenant of grace, particularly the similarity and dissimilarity of the covenant in…
-
Faith and Infant Baptism in Augustine and Aquinas
The historical evidence shows that infant baptism was regularly practiced from at least the 3rd or 4th century until the present day. One of the topics of discussion in the early church was how baptism could be an expression of faith when infants are not capable of expressing their own faith. Of particular importance in this discussion was Augustine, who is well known for being the most influential theological figure of that time. In Augustine’s discussion of baptism, after having explained that baptism belongs to those who repent of their sins, Augustine addresses the obvious problem of what are infants repenting? “Now, inasmuch as infants are not held bound by any sins of their own actual life, it is the guilt of original sin which is healed in them by the grace of Him who saves them by the laver of regeneration.”[1] In other words, although infants do not have…