Questions Regarding Paedobaptism and the Regulative Principle

 

John,

Thank you for your willingness to entertain questions by email. The practical necessity of concluding each WCF session within the allotted fifty minutes understandably limits the opportunity for extended discussion of questions that naturally arise during the presentations.

The matters I raise here are, to some extent, “cabbage we have chewed before,” having grown out of prior correspondence with John Homann on this topic. I fully appreciate your responsibility to articulate and defend Northside’s position with respect to paedobaptism. My hope, however, is that you might also engage forthrightly with some of the theological challenges that attend that position.

Chief among these is the Regulative Principle of Worship, long embraced within the Reformed tradition (i.e., What Scripture does not command is forbidden.) This principle raises an unavoidable question with respect to paedobaptism, namely, the absence of either an explicit biblical command or inarguable example.

Closely related is the candid acknowledgment by numerous theologians and pastors—nearly all of whom nonetheless practice paedobaptism—that the practice is not explicitly taught in Scripture. By way of illustration:

• B. B. Warfield affirmed that infant baptism does not appear in Scripture.
• Schleiermacher wrote, “All traces of infant baptism which have been asserted to be found in the New Testament must first be inserted there.”
• Lutheran scholar Kurt Aland, following extensive study, concluded that there is no definite proof of infant baptism until after the third century, adding, “This cannot be contested.”
• Catholic theologian Haggelbacher similarly wrote, “This controversy has shown that it is not possible to bring in absolute proof of infant baptism by basing one’s argument on the Bible.”
• John MacArthur, though a Reformed credobaptist, articulates the issue starkly when he states that infant baptism is neither mentioned, commanded, nor exemplified anywhere in Scripture, rendering it impossible to prove biblically from either the New or Old Testament.

As you know, support for paedobaptism therefore rests not on direct biblical warrant, but on theological inference and ecclesial tradition.

Finally, the early witness of Tertullian is worth noting. While not rejecting infant baptism outright, he offered several cautions regarding the practice, including:

1. That baptism should be delayed.
2. That sponsors should not be placed in jeopardy if the child were to fail in fulfillment of their promises.
3. That children should be permitted to come to Christ when they are able to know Him.
4. That baptism should be reserved for those who know how to ask for salvation.

I offer these observations not polemically, but in the hope of thoughtful and faithful engagement regarding issues with which many in the Reformed community continue to wrestle. I appreciate your time and your willingness to consider these concerns.