Why do some Christian Dominations not Baptise Infants?
Rev Charlie (May 2022)
On Sunday 1st May, we baptised two children; nine year old Isla, who has a good understanding of baptism and six month old George who does not. Most Christians belong to denominations that practice infant baptism: Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans and Methodists, to name but a few. However, some denominations do not practice infant baptism, Pentecostal denominations for example. These denominations believe that baptism must follow an individual’s personal choice to follow Christ.
So, is there a precedent for infant baptism in the New Testament? Not expressly, however, there are various examples of whole households being baptised, for example, the households of Cornelius (Acts 10), Lydia (Acts 16), the Jailer (Acts 16) and Stephanus (1 Cor. 1). It is important to note that households consisting of nuclear families are a relatively modern phenomenon. In 1st century Palestine a household would have included extended family and even slaves. It is hard to imagine that none of the households mentioned above included small children and infants. When the New Testament speaks of a household being baptised, it almost certainly indicates everyone who belonged to that household.
Moreover, baptising infants would have come very naturally to first century Jews, who had converted to Christianity. For Jews, circumcision was (and is) the sign of the covenant and all males were (and are) circumcised on the eighth day, including Jesus himself (Matt. 2: 21). The sign of the new covenant is Baptism. Jewish Christians would have assumed that this sign was to be received by infants and children belonging to believing families. In our highly individualised culture, we tend to place an emphasis on personal choice, however, it is important to understand that people in the first century did not see themselves as individuals in the same way that we do. Personal identity was inseparable from, and more closely connected with, familial, tribal and national identity. The forgoing observations infer that when a household was baptised it included male and female, young and old, slave and free.
When a believing parent has their infant child baptised, they are effectively taking that child by the hand and leading them on the path that Christ has set before them. They are opting their child into the Christian faith and nurturing their child in the way of Christ, in the hope that they will one-day lay hold of that faith for themselves. In other words, we assume our children are Christian, until such time as they decide otherwise, rather than assuming that our children are not Christian until they make a firm decision later on in life.
That having been said, it is important to point out that baptism, in and of itself, does not guarantee entry into God’s kingdom, rather it is one of three important marks of being a Christian. Christians believe (in the sense that they put their trust in Jesus), they are baptised and they are filled with the Holy Spirit, though not necessarily in that order. All baptised Christians should, when they are able, make an informed decision and proclaim their own faith in Christ, which is the purpose of Confirmation.
Finally, infant baptism points to the fact that God is at work in our lives long before we know it and amongst people who will never know it (at least not in this life). Many people cannot say a definite ‘yes’ to Christ because of severe mental impairment. However, we believe that they can and will be included in God’s kingdom and should therefore be baptised as a sign of that.
From an Anglican perspective, if a person has been baptised as an infant, they do not need to be re-baptised as an adult, instead, through confirmation, they should affirm the fact of their baptism and their resolve to continue in the way of Christ.
