The following is intended not as irrefutable evidence,
nor as the first line of an apologetic for infant baptism. It is certainly neither. The Scriptures themselves, especially
the Scriptural teaching of sin, grace, and faith, form the clear basis for the practice. However these passages do present
the clear practice of infant baptism in the ancient church of the second through the fourth centuries.
Aristides
"And when a child has been born to one of them[ie Christians], they give thanks to God[ie baptism]; and if moreover
it happen to die in childhood, they give thanks to God the more, as for one who as passed through the world without sins."
Apology,15(A.D. 140),in ANF,X:277-278
Polycarp St. Polycarp, was the disciple of the
Apostle John himself (as well as an associate of the Apostle Philip). And, in AD 155, St. Polycarp said this at his execution:
"Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me injury. How can I blaspheme
my King and Savior?" (Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp 9 c. AD 156)
Now, it is well documented that "The Martyrdom of Polycarp" was written the year after the
saint's execution; and so the quote above is extremely reliable. It is also well documented that Polycarp was 86 years old
at the time of his death. Therefore, if the saint claims to have served Jesus for 86 years, it therefore follows that he
was Baptized as an infant. And, in another place, we are told that Polycarp was Baptized by none other than the Apostle
John! :-) Therefore, at least in the case of St. John, we can show conclusively that the Apostles Baptized infants.
Justin
Martyr
"And many,both men and
women, who have been Christ's disciples from childhood, remain pure and at the age of sixtey or seventy years...". First Apology,15:6(A.D. 110-165),in ANF,I:167
"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true . .
. are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For,
in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive
the washing with water. For Christ also said, 'Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven'
[John 3:3First Apology 61 (AD 151).
Irenaeus (120-202 A.D.) St. Irenaeus was the disciple of St. Polycarp, who was
the disciple of the Apostle John himself (as well as an associate of the Apostle Philip).
"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children,
and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child
for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect
not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).
"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven
times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified
upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means
of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn
babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into
the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).
and, in AD 180, St. Irenaeus writes:
Polycrates
"I, therefore, brethren, who have
lived sixy-five years in the Lord." Fragment in Eusebius' Church History, V:24:7(A.D.
190),in NPNF2,I:242
Tertullian
Here Tertullian comments on his preference of
delaying baptism in deference to the traditional practice of baptizing infants writes:
"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." On Baptism,18(A.D. 200/206),in
ANF,III:678
St. Hippolytus
of Rome (170-236 A.D.) St.
Hippolytus was the disciple of St. Irenaeus of Lyon.
"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other
relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).
Origen:
(185-254 A.D.) I
take this occasion to discuss something which our brothers often inquire about. Infants are baptized for the remission of
sins. Of what kinds? Or when did they sin? But since "No one is exempt from stain," one removes the stain by the mystery of
baptism. For this reason infants are baptized. For "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom
of heaven." (Origen,Homily on Luke,XIV(A.D. 233),in JER, 65)
[After
quoting Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:4] These verses may be adduced when it is asked why, since the baptism of the church is given
for the remission of sins, baptism according to the practice of the
church is given even to infants; since indeed
if there is in infants nothing which ought to pertain to forgiveness and mercy, the grace of baptism would be superfluous.
(Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).
[After quoting Leviticus 12:8 and Psalm 51:5]
For this also the church had a tradition from the apostles, to give baptism even to infants. For they to whom the secrets
of the divine mysteries were
given knew that there is in all persons the natural
stains of sin which must be washed away by the water and the Spirit. On account of these stains the body itself is called
the body of sin. (Commentaries on Romans
5:9 [A.D. 248])
St. Cyprian
of Carthage (252AD) –
"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second
or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think
that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise.
No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought
to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).
In
respect of the case of infants, which you say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after birth, and that
the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded, so that you think that one who is just born should not be baptized and
sanctified within the eighth day, we all thought very differently in our council. For in this course which you thought was
to be taken, no one agreed; but we all rather judge that the mercy and grace of God is not to be refused to any one born of
man... Spiritual circumcision ought not to be hindered by carnal circumcision... we ought to shrink from hindering an infant,
who, being lately born, has not sinned, except in that, being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the
contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth, who approaches the more easily on this very account to the reception
of the forgiveness of sins - that to him are remitted, not his own sins, but the sins of another. … we think is to be
even more observed in respect of infants and newly-born person" (Cyprian, Epistle 58, To Fides [54] -- AD 251).
Christians "receive also the baptism of the Church . . . then finally can they be fully sanctified
and be the sons of God . . . since it is written, 'Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the kingdom of God' [John 3:5]" (Letters 71[72]:1 (AD 252).
Optatus
of Mileve
"It shows no
crease when infants put it on[ie the baptismal garment], it is not too scanty for young men, it fits women without alteration." Against Parmenium,5:10(A.D. 365),in JER, 94
Ambrose
"Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.' No one is expected:
not the infant, not the one prevented by necessity." Abraham,2,11:79(A.D. 387),in
JUR,2:169
St. Gregory Nazianzus (381 AD)
"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his
most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature?
Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism
40:7 [A.D. 388]).
"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about
those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond],
if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid.,
40:28).
John Chrysostom
"You
see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we
have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal]
sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that
they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Ad
Neophytos Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D.
388]).
Jerome
"While the son is a child and thinks
as a child and until he comes to years of discretion to choose between the two roads to which the letter of Pythagoras points,
his parents are responsible for his actions whether these be good or bad. But perhaps you imagine that, if they are not baptized,
the children of Christians are liable for their own sins; and that no guilt attaches to parents who withhold from baptism
those who by reason of their tender age can offer no objection to it. The truth is that, as baptism ensures the salvation
of the child, this in turn brings advantage to the parents. Whether you would offer your child or not lay within your choice,
but now that you have offered her, you neglect her at your peril." To Laeta,Epistle 107:6(A.D. 403),in NPNF2,VI:191
" 'C. Tell me, pray,
and rid me of all doubts, why little children are baptized.?
A. That their sins may be forgiven them in baptism." Against
the Pelagians,3:18(A.D. 415),in NPNF2,VI:482
Council
of Carthage V
"Item: It seemed good that
whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized
and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments
to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the
sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children]
from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).
"Likewise it has been
decided that whoever says that infants fresh from their mothers' wombs ought not to be baptized....let him be anathema." Canon
2,(A.D. 418),in Denzinger 101
Augustine
"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly
believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the
sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not
able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).
"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way
as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).
"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet
able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers,
grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians
call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from
an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and
participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation
and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should
themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of
regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants
1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).
"Now, seeing that they
[Pelagians] admit the necessity of baptizing infants,--finding themselves unable to contravene that authority of the universal
Church, which has been unquestionably handed down by the Lord and His apostles,--they cannot avoid the further concession,
that infants require the same benefits of the Mediator, in order that, being washed by the sacrament and charity of the faithful,
and thereby incorporated into the body of Christ, which is the Church, they may be reconciled to God, and so live in Him,
and be saved, and delivered, and redeemed, and enlightened. But from what, if not from death, and the vices, and guilt, and
thraldom, and darkness of sin? And, inasmuch as they do not commit any sin in the tender age of infancy by their actual transgression,
original sin only is left." On forgiveness of sin, and baptism,39[26](A.D. 412),in NPNF1,V:30
"The blessed Cyprian,
indeed, said, in order to correct those who thought that an infant should not be baptized before the eighth day, that it was
not the body but the soul which behoved to be saved from perdition -- in which statement he was not inventing any new doctrine,
but preserving the firmly established faith of the Church; and he, along with some of his colleagues in the episcopal office,
held that a child may be properly baptized immediately after its birth" Epistle 166:8:23(A.D. 412),in NPNF1,I:531
"Likewise,
whosoever says that those children who depart out of this life without partaking of that sacrament shall be made alive in
Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration, and condemns the universal Church,in which it is the practice to
lose no time and run in haste to administer baptism to infant children, because it is believed, as an indubitable truth, that
otherwise they cannot be made alive in Christ." Augustine,Epistle 167,7,21(A.D. 415),in NPNF1,I:530
"From the time he [Jesus] said, 'Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the kingdom of heaven' [John 3:5], and again, 'He that loses his life for my sake shall find it' [Matt. 10:39], no one
becomes a member of Christ except it be either by baptism in Christ or death for Christ" (On the Soul and Its Origin
1:10 [A.D. 419]).
"It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated . . . when that
infant is brought to baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the infant so presented is reborn. For it is not written,
'Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents' or 'by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him,' but,
'Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit' [John 3:5]. The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament
of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated
in Adam" (Letters 98:2 [A.D. 408]).
For from the infant newly born to the old man
bent with age, as there is none shut out from baptism, so there is none who in baptism does not die to sin. (Enchiridion;
ch. 43)
The Inscriptions
Here the words of Everett Ferguson are appropriate:
"Early Christian inscriptions, which in the largest numbers come from the environs of Rome, furnish some instances of child
and infant baptism for the third century . . . Nearly all the early Christian inscriptions are epitaphs. A considerable number
of these are for the graves of children. The vast majority give no evidence whether the child was baptized or not . . . Actually
the word "baptism" is seldom used.
The idea is expressed by "received grace," "made
a believer" or "neophyte" (newly planted " used to mean "newly baptized") – from Everett Ferguson, Early Christians
Speak: Faith and Life in the
First Three Centuries; Revised Edition (Abilene:
ACU Press, 1984) .
To the sacred dead. Florentius made this monument
to his worthy son Appronianus, who lived one year, nine months, and five days. Since he was dearly loved by his grandmother,
and she saw that he was going to die, she asked from the church that he might depart from the world a believer. (ILCV I:1343,
from the third century; edited by E. Diehl (second edition; Berlin, 1961))
Postumius Eutenion, a believer, who obtained holy
grace the day before his birthday at a very late hour and died. He lived six years and was buried on the fifth of Ides of
July on the day of Jupiter on
which he was born. His soul is with the saints
in peace. Felicissimus, Eutheria, and Festa his grandmother to their worthy son Postumius. (ILCV I:1524, from the early fourth
century)
Sweet Tyche lived one year, ten months, fifteen
days, Received [grace] on the eighth day before the Kalends. Gave up [her soul] on the same day. (Inscriptiones latinae christianae
veteres, Vol. I
number 1531)
Irene who lived with her parents ten months and
six days received [grace] seven days before the Ides of April and gave up [her soul] on the Ides of April. (ILCV I:1532)
To Proiecto, neophyte infant, who lived two years
seven months. (ILCV I:1484)
Council
of Mileum II
"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed
baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath
of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin
entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must
not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule
of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto
the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon
3 [A.D. 416]).
African
Code
"Concerning
the Donatists it seemed good that we should hold counsel with our brethren and fellow priests Siricius and Simplician concerning
those infants alone who are baptized by Donatists: lest what they did not do of their own will, when they should be converted
to the Church of God with a salutary determination, the error of their parents might prevent their promotion to the ministry
of the holy altar." Canon 47/51(A.D. 419), in NPNF2,XIV:463
Cyril of Alexandria
"Believest thou this?...when
a newborn child is brought forward to receive the anointing of initiation, or rather of consumation through holy baptism." Commentary on John,7(A.D. 428),in JER,95
Pope
Leo the Great[regn A.D. 440-461]
"QUESTION XIX. Concerning those who after being baptized in infancy were captured by the Gentiles, and lived with them
after the manner of the Gentiles, when they come back to Roman territory as still young men, if they seek communion, what
shall be done?
REPLY.
If they have only lived with Gentiles and eaten sacrificial food, they can be purged by fasting and laying on of hands, in
order that for the future abstaining from things offered to idols, they may be partakers of Christ's mysteries. But if they
have either worshipped idols or been polluted with manslaughter or fornication, they must not be admitted to communion, except
by public penance." To Rusticus,Epistle 167(A.D. 459),in NPNF2,XII:112
Gregory the Great[regn A.D. 590-604]
"But with respect to
trine immersion in baptism, no truer answer can be given than what you have yourself felt to be right; namely that, where
there is one faith, a diversity of usage does no harm to holy Church. Now we, in immersing thrice, signify the sacraments
of the three days' sepulture; so that, when the infant is a third time lifted out of the water, the resurrection after a space
of three days may be expressed." To Leander,Epistle 43(A.D. 591),in NPNF2,XII:88
CONCLUSION:
1) No incident is recorded in the earliest of Christian history which gives evidence that baptism was forbidden
to any person on the basis of an age limit, or that the right of a Christian parent to have his children baptized had ever
been challenged or renounced.
2) Although several examples exist from the third century of the children of Christians being baptized
as infants, in all of the literature and collections of inscriptions from that century there is not a single example of Christian
parents delaying the baptism of their children.
3) Neither the Ebionites, Novatians, Arians, Donatists, Montanists, nor any other early heresy refuted infant
baptism; many were even noted as practicing it.
4) A significant parallel exists between Jewish proselyte baptism (when pagans were converted to Judaism)
and early Christian baptism. The contacts between early Christian baptism and proselyte baptism, with the similarities in
terminology, interpretation, symbolism, and the rite itself, are especially notable. What is of greatest interest, however,
is that the baptism of the early Church followed that of proselyte baptism, in which children and infants were baptized with
the convert's family. This is especially significant when one realizes that the very early Church was made up primarily of
converted Jews.
5)
There is no evidence that anyone being against infant baptism in the early Church on the grounds that you must first "believe"
and be baptized. Tertulian (160 230 A.D.), was the only one who questioned infant baptism. The bulk of his objection, however,
was due to his heresy that sin after baptism was almost unforgivable.
6) Cyprian, a leading bishop of North Africa, convened a synod of sixty-six bishops at Carthage to
discuss whether or not they felt that infant baptism should be delayed until the eighth day after birth instead of the usual
second or third day. Their unanimous decision upheld the universally accepted practice which they had always followed.
infants of eight days old, were once, and that by express
divine appointment, made the subjects of circumcision. Now circumcision is expressly said by the apostle to be a "seal of
the righteousness of faith" (Rom. 4:11), as well as baptism. But were children of eight days old then capable of
exercising faith, when they were circumcised, more than they are now when they are baptized? Surely the objection before us
is as valid in the one case as in the other
To grasp the background and origins of Infant Baptism we must understand the original recipients of the New Covenant.
During the first years, the members of the Church were exclusively Jewish. The Jews practiced infant circumcision, as mandated
to Abraham (Gn 17:12), reaffirmed in the Mosaic Law (Lv 12:3), and demonstrated
by the circumcision of Jesus on his eighth day (Lu 2:21). Without circumcision
no male was allowed to participate in the cultural and religious life of Israel.
The rite of circumcision as the doorway into the Old Covenant was replaced in the New Covenant with the rite of Baptism-both
applied to infants. St. Paul makes this correlation: "In him
also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of
Christ; and you were buried with him in baptism" (Co 2:11-12). The Catechism
informs us that "this sign [of circumcision] prefigures that 'circumcision of Christ' which is Baptism" (CCC no. 527).
When Peter preached under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost he was speaking to a Jewish audience
(Ac 2:5-35). Peter announced, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of
your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children" (Ac 2:38-39).
The Jews would have been dismayed had the New Covenant not included their children, especially since it was promised to them,
and the New Covenant was to be an improvement over the Old in which they were included.
In the middle of the second century Infant Baptism is mentioned not as an innovation, but as a rite instituted by the
apostles. Nowhere do we find it prohibited and everywhere we find it practiced. Early in the nascent Church we have St. Irenaeus
(c. 130-c. 200) who provides a very early witness to Infant Baptism, based on John 3:5. Irenaeus wrote, "For He [Jesus] came
to save all through means of Himself-all, I say, who through Him are born again to God,-infants, and children, and boys, and
youths, and old men" (Against Heresies, 2, 22, 4).
Origen (AD c. 185-c. 254) who had traveled to the extents of the Roman Empire wrote
with confidence, "The Church received from the Apostles the tradition [custom] of giving Baptism even to infants. For the
Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sin,
which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentary on Romans 5, 9).
St. Augustine confirmed the ubiquitous teaching of the Church when he wrote, "This [infant baptism] the Church always
had, always held; this she received from the faith of our ancestors; this she perseveringly guards even to the end" (Augustine,
Sermon. 11, De Verb Apost) and "Who is so impious as to wish to exclude infants from the kingdom of heaven by forbidding them
to be baptized and born again in Christ?" (Augustine, On Original Sin 2, 20).
In fact, the only reported controversy on the
subject was a third-century debate whether or not to delay baptism until the eighth day after birth, like its Old Testament
equivalent, circumcision!
Some may ask why Sts. John Chrysostom, Gregory of Nanziansus,
Basil the Great, and Jerome were all baptized as adults, even though they had at least one Christian parent. The earliest
evidence that Christian parents refrained from having their child baptized immediately after birth is in the middle of the
fourth century (Gregory was the first example of this in 360 A.D.). None of these men postponed their baptism because of faith,
however. Surely Gregory and John Chrysostom at 30, Jerome at 20, and Basil at 27 (at which ages they were baptized) had reached
the "age of reason" and individual faith long before then. They postponed their baptisms on the false premise that they could
better assure themselves a place in heaven if they minimized the times they sinned after baptism. None of these men ever challenged
the validity of infant baptism.
The Roman Catholic Church considers baptism, even for infants, so important that "parents
are obliged to see that their infants are baptised within the first few weeks" and, "if the infant is in danger of death,
it is to be baptised without any delay." It declares: "The practice of infant Baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church.
There is explicit testimony to this practice from the second century on, and it is quite possible that, from the beginning
of the apostolic preaching, when whole 'households' received baptism, infants may also have been baptized." It notes that,
"when the first direct evidence of infant Baptism appears in the second century, it is never presented as an innovation",
that second-century Irenaeus treated baptism of infants as a matter of course, and that, "at a Synod of African Bishops, St.
Cyprian stated that 'God's mercy and grace should not be refused to anyone born', and the Synod, recalling that 'all human
beings' are 'equal', whatever be 'their size or age', declared it lawful to baptize children 'by the second or third day after
their birth'." Infant baptism is seen as showing very clearly that salvation is an unmerited favour from God, not the fruit
of human effort. "Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in
Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which
all men are called... The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they
not to confer Baptism shortly after birth."
The present Catholic attitude accords perfectly with early Christian practices. None of the
Fathers or councils of the Church was claiming that the practice was contrary to Scripture or tradition. They agreed that
the practice of baptizing infants was the customary and appropriate practice since the days of the early Church; the only
uncertainty seemed to be when—exactly—an infant should be baptized. Further evidence that infant baptism was the
accepted practice in the early Church is the fact that if infant baptism had been opposed to the religious practices of the
first believers, why do we have no record of early Christian writers condemning it?
But Fundamentalists try to ignore the historical writings from the early Church which clearly
indicate the legitimacy of infant baptism.
Christ Reigns!!