Tertullian on Infant Baptism

Originating in the Roman province of Africa, Tertullian was a prolific writer during the early Christian era. He was the first writer of Christian literature in Latin to produce a substantial body of work. He was an early Christian polemicist and apologist who combats heresy, such as modern Christian Gnosticism.

 Both "the founder of Western thought" and "the father of Latin Christianity" are titles that have been attributed to Tertullian.

Tertulian advised against the usage of infant baptism:

And so, according to the circumstances and disposition, and even age, of each individual, the delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children. For why is it necessary — if (baptism itself) is not so necessary — that the sponsors likewise should be thrust into danger? Who both themselves, by reason of mortality, may fail to fulfil their promises, and may be disappointed by the development of an evil disposition, in those for whom they stood?

The Lord does indeed say, Forbid them not to come unto me. Let them come, then, while they are growing up; let them come while they are learning, while they are learning whither to come; let them become Christians when they have become able to know Christ. Why does the innocent period of life hasten to the remission of sins? More caution will be exercised in worldly matters:

so that one who is not trusted with earthly substance is trusted with divine! Let them know how to ask for salvation, that you may seem (at least) to have given to him that asks. For no less cause must the unwedded also be deferred — in whom the ground of temptation is prepared, alike in such as never were wedded by means of their maturity, and in the widowed by means of their freedom — until they either marry, or else be more fully strengthened for continence. If any understand the weighty import of baptism, they will fear its reception more than its delay: sound faith is secure of salvation. (Tertullian, on Baptism, CHAPTER 18)

Here, Tertullian offers four suggestions for baptism of infants. He states that:

The “little children” should have their baptism delayed.

Why should the sponsors be put into danger by the failure of the little child to fulfill the promises of the sponsors?

They should not be forbidden to come but be permitted to come to Christ “when they have become able to know Christ."

They should not be given baptism until they “know how to ask for salvation” so that they can “have given to him that asks”.

If Tertullian advised against baptizing infants until they are at least old enough "to know," should we not then ask ourselves some sincere questions regarding what occurs once we "ask for salvation" and "follow Christ"? 

Was infant baptism a procedure carried out in the year 200 in the church worldwide? Nothing suggests that it was. 

At the very least, if we believe that it was being done somewhere (which appears to be the case), since he was advocating against doing it in favor of delaying it, why would Tertullian not have seen sufficient proof that it was a widespread practice in the Church that had evolved into a tradition after having been widely followed in the past?

 Are you still genuinely of the opinion that there was a common practice from the beginning that churches were in the habit of baptizing children during its earliest recorded history.  According to Tertullian's logic, as was previously mentioned, it's possible that the practice had not been a widespread custom and tradition?

What does it signify if Tertullian questioned it because it isn't followed everywhere? You've just always taken it for granted that it's been used and recognized as the tradition going back to the Apostles' time?

Lastly, given that Tertullian was challenging it within his own framework, should we presume that there were instances in which other people heeded his advice and held off on baptizing their infants until they might inquire about it? Also, were there any potential locations where the practice was being performed?