Infant Baptism: Scripture, Faith, and Original Sin Debate

Introduction: The Controversy Over Infant Baptism

Infant baptism remains one of the most controversial and divisive subjects in Christianity. The Catholic Church has long proposed scriptural and theological support for the practice, based largely on the concept of original sin. Baptism is a means by which a child can be symbolically — or actually — cleansed of original sin, represented by the spiritual stain of physical birth. Another reason why infant baptism has become entrenched in some churches is that it functions as a rite of passage. Baptism is in fact one of the holiest Catholic sacraments and one of the most important rites of passage in the human life course.

Scripture offers some tacit, though not explicit, support for infant baptism, grounded in the emphasis Christ placed on water baptism as a prerequisite for entering Heaven: "Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit" (John 3:5). One could also suggest that there is no harm in infant baptism, for it represents the ritual entry of the child into Christ's kingdom and prevents any potential problems that might arise had the infant died before being baptized.

Scriptural and Theological Arguments in Favor

Infant baptism is also framed as a genuine spiritual obligation to Christ. "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). The phrase "every one of you" can be read as referring to each human being regardless of age. However compelling these reasons are, the practice is not overtly supported by scripture. One of the most significant objections to infant baptism rests on the fact that an infant has not yet developed the cognitive faculties to consciously accept Christ and profess faith, making infant baptism an empty and ultimately meaningless practice that denies the fundamental importance of active belief.

Unless the family belongs to a church community that strongly supports infant baptism, the practice is largely without spiritual effect, because it is the conscious act of faith — not the ritual act of baptism — that creates an individual's covenant with God.

The Case Against Infant Baptism

Original sin is not a sufficient reason to justify the mandatory practice of infant baptism. Baptism in infancy might remove the "pollution of birth," but it cannot prevent problems that arise from natural sin (Lutzer 119). Natural sin evolves as the individual makes choices, and one of those choices should be to have faith in Christ. The act of faith includes a confession of sins — and babies are not capable of confessing sin (Boyd and Eddy 203).

Scripture clearly outlines the importance of baptism, but not necessarily infant baptism, in preparing the soul for discipleship. Infant baptism can be viewed as a symbolic act and little more, since "baptism follows faith and constitutes the first act of discipleship made by a responsible person who has decided to follow Jesus" (Boyd and Eddy 204). A person who was baptized as an infant may stray from God, as that individual never actually made a conscientious decision to follow Him. It is far more important to be reborn in Christ as an adult — or even an older child who recognizes his or her role in the world and understands the meaning of discipleship. Thus, even if infant baptism does wipe clean the stain of original sin, it cannot and does not prepare a person for a life devoted to Christ.

Works Cited

Boyd, Gregory A. and Eddy, Paul. Across the Spectrum. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

Lutzer, Erwin. The Doctrines that Divide. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1998.