I’ve been involved in some conversations here and there about United Methodist theology of baptism. (Those who snicker at the pairing of the words “United Methodist” and “theology” can just leave the room now.)
Here is my non-systematic set of reasons why I happily affirm Article 17 of the Articles of Religion, which calls for the church to maintain the baptism of young children.
Because I’m a United Methodist. No theology here. Just obedience. A lot of men and women who have come before me, including John Wesley, have sorted through the arguments pro and con and affirmed infant baptism. As a United Methodist, I have no call to disobey where by conscience does not require me to do so.
Because of Scripture. These arguments can go on forever – and have. Here is a very condensed version of my understanding.
In Judaism, a young boy is circumcised shortly after birth as a mark of his identity as one of the chosen people of God. At a year old, a young boy of Jesus’ day was brought to the Temple. In neither case did the boy make a statement of belief or even get asked what he thought. As a child of Jewish parents, he was a part of the people of God and so marked and consecrated. When adult non-Jews wanted to convert to Judaism, there was a different process. They had a series of steps they had to go through. They were taught and required to make certain claims. They entered Israel after a period of teaching and oversight.
In Jesus’ day and even in the apostolic church of Acts, we see how the community speaks to outsiders. Indeed, the Book of Acts is specifically about how the church spread and grew among non-believers. The few instances of “internal church” matters discussed in Acts were directly related to managing the incorporation of newcomers and dealing with growing pangs.
Given this, it is not at all surprising that nearly every case of baptism in Acts were adult baptisms. The apostles did not hang out a lot in nursery wards. But we do have a couple instances of “entire households” and “entire families” being baptized, which indicates to me that children were not viewed as excluded from the family of God until they reached a certain age. And Acts tells us nothing either way about the baptism of the children of believers. It says as little about whether they were baptized as adults as it does about whether they were baptized as children. The children of believers are not the central concern of Acts.
The earliest church fathers, however, treat infant baptism as noncontroversial. Well before the dreaded Constantian settlement, Christians were baptizing babies. I assume they read their bibles. Indeed, some of the earliest would have been baptized as children by men who would have known the apostles.
In sum, I see two ways to enter the people of God. One, be born to parents who are believers and be baptized by a congregation that welcomes you as a child of God and pledges to nurture and raise you in the knowledge and love of Christ. At some time, as you mature, you would be asked to take on your own shoulders the responsibilities your parents claimed for you as an infant.
The second way is to come as an adult convert. In this case, your nurture and teaching takes place prior to entry into the people of God. You are brought to baptism as the end of a process of initiation into the life of God’s people.
In either case, the significance of baptism is as entrance and initiation into God’s holy people. In neither case is baptism merely some personal pledge or promise to God. Every baptism is a communal sacrament. The congregation’s vows on the behalf of the baptized person are at least as important as the vows taken by the one (or on behalf of the one) entering God’s church.
Because of it is of God not humanity. A sacrament is an outward sign of an inward and spiritual grace. We humans bake the bread or pour the water. We say certain words. But without the Holy Spirit’s power, they are just bread and water. It is God’s actions in the sacraments that make them what they are, not ours.
Yes, adult converts need to repent before they can come to baptism. This is because it is by definition impossible to walk in the dark and the light at the same time. But repentance is not baptism. To make human actions the central feature and definition of baptism is to make God secondary.
This is my understanding, poorly formed and poorly articulated as it is. If I have written anything that runs afoul of United Methodist teaching, I hope to be corrected.
The question about what baptism means is of vital significance because baptism sets the form into which discipleship develops. The grace-filled, Spirit empowered new life as one of God’s holy people and surrounded by God’s holy church takes decisive shape in baptism. To receive baptism – as either and infant or adult – is to be given a new identity, one that never washes away. It is to be called to live into a new life. It is to be surrounded by brothers and sisters of every age and background.
It is not something that you or I do. It is something we are given. As such, whether we are 8 days old or 80 years old, we are not capable of fully understanding what we are getting into or what God is doing to, with, and through us in baptism. We come, just as we are, naked as a baby.
I am a part-time local pastor serving 
This love we believe to be the medicine of life, the never-failing remedy for all the evils of a disordered world, for all the miseries and vices of men. Wherever this is, there are virtue and happiness going hand in hand. There is humbleness of mind, gentleness, long-suffering, the whole image of God; and at the same time a peace that passeth all understanding, and joy unspeakable and full of glory.
I have told this a number of times on my own blog.
I was baptized as an infant. When I was in college, a wanna-be pastor told me, in no uncertain terms, that it didn’t count and unless I did something then and there, I would not be considered saved. Were it to have been done in a more positive and hopeful way, I might have considered it. But, considering the time and the place and what I was going through at the time and the manner in which it was discussed, I choose to not take up the offer.
Do I regret not be baptized as an adult. Not really. I don’t recall what transpired when I was baptized as an infant but I know that the manner in which I was raised and the committment to Christ that my parents made on my behalf kept the covenant made with the baptism.
That is the key to the baptism of any infant or child. It is a committment made by the parents and the congregation to see the child grow up. I personally think that we don’t emphasize that point and then when the child is an adult and can think on their own, they walk away because the covenant was never completed.
Tony, I agree that we tend to underplay the covenant of baptism. We view it as a private family thing rather than a covenant undertaken by the whole congregation.
Well-written and well thought out, John. Thank you.
While Acts is not concerned with the children of believers, some of Paul’s writings deal directly with the issue (Ephesians 6:4, for example). Yet nothing in Paul suggests anything other than the immersion baptism of believers. I know it’s not compelling to argue from a negative (as in “Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexuality so he must be OK with it!”), yet I offer this observation from Paul as food for thought.
Thanks again for continuing the conversation so well.
The way I officiate a dedication of a child still entails the congregation in a vow, along with the parents, to raise a child in the Christian faith. In fact, I normally use the baptism rite out the hymnal and simply adapt it for a dedication, so the parents and congregation make the same vows as if a baptism had occurred. I just say that to express that a congregation can undertake a vow without having to baptize the child. All that being said, I baptize children willingly, although not with a lot of enthusiasm.
I’ve been in Larry’s place.
Baptizing children “not with a lot of enthusiasm” is not nearly as much fun as immersing believers with a lot of enthusiasm.
Amen to that, Talbot. The few times I have had that privilege to immerse believers has always been amazing.
Hello gentlemen! Larry, I think you hit on something important. If the pastor is not enthusiastic about infant baptism, it’s impossible for the baptism to take on much meaning for the congregation. Even worse, it shortchanges the family who is presenting the child for baptism. Infant baptism needs to be a fire in the belly of at least the pastor. If that can’t happen then the family should be spared a going-through-the-motions ceremony.
Personally, I’ve not experienced a believer’s baptism that takes on more significance than an infant baptism. Age and mental acuity have less to do with enthusiasm than the understanding the pastor and congregation bring to the ceremony. I, and I think most in my congregation, take as much joy from the baptism of a six-week-old as we do a 60-year-old.
Adam, I do think you’re right about that. The way a pastor feels about things is certainly going to affect it. If it was about my personal preference, I wouldn’t do an infant baptism at all. Yet, for some of the reasons John outlines, I do it regardless when asked, especially the first one – I am United Methodist, and therefore, despite my disagreement with it, I submit to the teachings and practice of my church). I’ll even defend the practice when necessary.
One of my reasons for being uncomfortable doing an infant baptism is somewhat related to the whole “the pastor determines readiness for membership” line of thinking, which I think is flawed. I’ll speak to that in a second, but one thing I think they have in common is the question of what does the pastor do when he or she does not think the people making the vows are being serious. I might (emphasis on “might”) be more comfortable in doing the infant baptisms if I thought the parents AND the congregation were not committing spiritual perjury in the vows when a sacrament of the church was involved. When I do a dedication, they might be committing the same perjury, but at least I’ve not undermined a sacrament at the same time.
On a different note, when it comes to membership readiness, at a minimum, I would want for the local church lay leadership and pastor in conjunction to identify and discern readiness for membership. To leave it in the hands of the pastor alone ends up ultimately with such different standards from one pastor to the next (ie what happened with the gay man in Virginia after case 1032). I do not know for sure, but I believe some congregations in the Reformed tradition have people apply for membership before the church consistory (lay board) and are interviewed. Something closer to that model sounds better than leaving it up to the pastor.
Larry, I totally agree about parental and congregational responsibility. Because a large part of our role is to encourage people to deepen their faith, we outline our expectation of both parental and congregational responsibility. I do not as of yet have sacramental responsibility, but we recently had a baptism in our church where the person baptizing explained very clearly and forcefully the responsibility of the congregation. Prior to the baptism, I met with the family and expressed that this is more than just a ceremony. It is a commitment being made by them to faithfully raise the child in the faith. They understood this and by the end of the service we acknowledged the weight of this responsibility by laying hands on the baby and family. The parental responsibility of raising the baby in Christ was transferred to all of us.
As for the perjury, you might have anticipated that I don’t believe the sacrament can be undermined. I believe instead that we can shipwreck our faith. This, of course, hinges on my accepting Methodist/Anglican baptismal theology hook, line, and sinker. Because I believe God is the one Who is doing, I never believe baptism fails, though people can certainly reject what they’ve been given. My experience is that whether baptized as infants, or baptized as adults, there’s a pretty good ratio of folks who eventually reject grace. My personal preference is to give people every grace of the faith regardless of age and provide the means for them to grow. That’s really all we can control, in my opinion.