I know, kinda corny title. 5 lashes in the public square.
Now, I’ve been prepping info for a baptism class for my church. Studying the history of baptism, why we baptize and what not. And of course, an intense discussion is always centered around paedo vs credo baptism. For you non-Bible geeks, paedo-baptism is when you baptise children despite their age and active public confession of faith. Credo-baptism where you only baptize people who have made a confession of faith.
For my whole Christian life, I’ve been a credo guy. My logic was this: If baptism is about taking your confession of faith public, how can someone who’s “faith” is purely shaped by their parents and no real confession of their own yet take this faith public?
But now I’m considering another question, and I’d love to hear from both sides on this: Why is it we believe that children can pray in faith privately and God will honor and respond, but those same children can’t receive the public sign of that faith via baptism?
Thoughts?
One Comment
Baptism, while sacred, doesn’t bear the same warning as taking communion when it comes to sacreliege. That being said, I wouldn’t stop a child from voluntarily wanting to be baptized after being catechized and knowing the significance of baptism. But, being a credo baptist myself, I don’t believe in baptizing babies who can make no such profession of faith.